We celebrate today 125 years from the birth of Karl Barth, undoubtedly the most important Christian theologian of the 2oth century.
On this occasion, Steve Harmon, a Facebook friend, has shared with us a link to one of Barth’s lectures, that he did in Chicago, on 26 April 1962. The fragment below is part of the Q&A at the end of the lecture. In it, Barth explains what he expects from American theology. What he said almost 50 years ago still holds true.
Here are Barth’s own words:
And here is a transcription:
If I myself were an American citizen and a Christian and a theologian, then I would try to elaborate a theology of freedom — a theology of freedom from, let us say, from any inferiority complex over against good old Europe from whence you all came, or your fathers. You do not need to have such an inferiority complex. That is what I have learned these weeks. You may also have freedom from a superiority complex, let us say, over against Asia and Africa. That’s a complex without reason. Then I may add — [your theology should also be marked by] freedom from fear of communism, Russia, inevitable nuclear warfare and generally speaking, from all the afore-mentioned principalities and powers. Freedom for which you would stand would be the freedom for — I like to say a single word — humanity. Being an American theologian, I would then look at the Statue of Liberty in the New York Harbor. I have not seen that lady, except in pictures. Next week I shall see her in person. That lady needs certainly a little or, perhaps, a good bit of demythologization. Nevertheless, maybe she may also be seen and interpreted and understood as a symbol of a true theology, not of liberty, but of freedom. Well, it would be necessarily, a theology of freedom. Of that freedom to which the Son frees us [cf. Jn 8.36], and which as His gift, is the one real human freedom. My last question for this evening is this: Will such a specific American theology one day arise? I hope so.
(Source: HERE)
Theology doesn’t change because God does not change.
By: nilewatch on 11 May 2011
at 1:11 am
Do you suggest that theology is revealed, as the Bible is? Let’s be serious. Even Bible translations change and should change, because language changes.
Theology is human response, based on God’s revelation, to changing realities. That is why it has to change all the time and should be different in different contexts.
Even the Bible itself contains theological diversity. Think about Paul and James.
Certainly, the strange fundamentalist habit of forced harmonisation denied that, but it cannot change the obvious.
By: DanutM on 11 May 2011
at 10:01 am
Agree with what you are saying Danut. And indeed il y a des paradoxes dans la Bible alors…… Si exegeza reveleaza lucuri noi sau mai degraba nuante noi…..
Merci pentru postarea aceasta.
By: maria on 11 May 2011
at 10:31 pm
as an American, I am not sure I agree completely with Barth … “American inferiority complex” … because I think what has done the US in (ex. Vietnam, Iraq, Bay of Pigs invasion, etc.) … is our send of “superiority complex.”
“Ain’t we smart?” “We are the best!” … “God bless America!” (… as if it is a whole planet, in and by itself).
My response .. Huhhh!
By: Gabriel Borlean on 12 May 2011
at 8:51 pm
also as an American, I think Bart is primarily refering to the Evangelical American Christian world.
This excludes the Reformation churches (Lutheran, and I would guess Anglican and Reformed theology) … where Freedom and Life in Christ … is never confused or mixed with Liberty and Welfare of a people. Prime example is the
Docrine of the 2 Kingdoms (God’s right hand – His kingdom and God’s left hand – the world kingdoms). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctrine_of_the_two_kingdoms
By: Gabriel Borlean on 12 May 2011
at 8:55 pm
another prime example of an American lutheran pastor telling it like it is … the faults, sinfullness, indulgences, etc. that they partake in … without having true Freedom from sin in Christ … is found in this 2 day old video I just watched
HIGHLY recommend it:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Revfiskj#p/u (at minute 8:30 or so; total run is 13:29 minutes).
“You were called to Freedom” says Rev. Fisk
By: Gabriel Borlean on 12 May 2011
at 9:02 pm
related to this post … “an American lutheran pastor telling it like it is … the faults, sinfullness, indulgences, etc. that they partake in” …
THEY is meant to mean
Americans in general,
living and digesting (lock, stock and barrell) the American culture junk-food.
By: Gabriel Borlean on 13 May 2011
at 3:29 pm
The point is not to change translations to fit modern language, but to learn the original and what is the original usage and understanding.
For example, the Hebrew “alma” in modern Hebrew means young girl, but 6,000 years ago meant “virgin.”
By: nilewatch on 13 May 2011
at 2:18 am
God does not contradict. If it appears so, something is lost in translation. James clearly teaches faith and works. Father Martin Luther, OSA. added the word “alone” to Romans. The original text in Koine Greek reads we are saved by faith, not we are saved by faith alone. Alone is a falsification.
By: nilewatch on 13 May 2011
at 2:41 am
@nilewatch … agree with you on the translation of Romans 3:28
I do not know of any modern translations that still have the word alone … even the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (conservative lutheran) which uses ESV for its liturgical services, does not have the adverb. But in Germany, any Luther 1528 version Bible still has it.
BUT, I would not use such a strong description … “falsification” … Luther’s choice of words … at the time (16th century) was but “to tip the balancing point to the middle”, if you will, on the abuses of the medieval western Church (works-heavy salvation .. and abuse of indulgences).
It is important … just like the post right above yours … to take account of the times (medieval late middle ages and spiritual darkness, supersitions galore, and a people who still had the memories of the Black Plague in the back of their minds).
By: Gabriel Borlean on 13 May 2011
at 3:25 pm
IMHO, if Luther lived in our times … he would not see the need to insert the advert “alone” in Romans 3:28 … because today’s RCC is different than the Papal monarchial monstrosity of the late medieval ages (think Babylonian Captivity … when there were 2-3 different popes at one time, Avignon vs. Roma).
By: Gabriel Borlean on 13 May 2011
at 3:27 pm