regard Ragaz became an admirer and an ardent supporter of Woodrow Wilson and his idea of the League of Nations. However, in Barth’s later stage, Ragaz was friendly to Barth’s theology. Barth was satisfied with Ragaz’s agreement with him. Ragaz also regarded “Barth’s gratitude to be an act of discipleship which casts a glow of reconciliation on the remainder of my earthly days.” Busch, Karl Barth: His Life, 322.
197. Kolakowski, Golden Age, 4.
198. Ibid., 20.
199. Krupskaja, Biographie, 116–21.
200. Egger, Entstehung der Kommunistischen Partei, 71.
201. Mattmüller, Leonhard Ragaz, 2:163.
202. Ibid., 163.
203. Ibid., 72.
204. Schellong, “Barth Lessen,” 14.
205. Barth, Humanity of God, 14.
206. Busch, Karl Barth: His Life, 81.
207. Smart, Revolutionary Theology, 14.
208. Rostig, Bergpredigt und Politik, 132.
209. Cf. Thurneysen, “Sozialismus und Christentum,” 221–46.
210. Ibid., 27.
211. Schellong “Barth Lessen,” 16.
212. Karl Barth to Wilhelm Herrmann, 4 Nov. 1914, in Schwoebel, Karl Barth-Martin Rade, 115. Cf. McCormack, Critically Realistic, 113.
213. Busch, Karl Barth: His Life, 82.
214. Marquardt, “Aktuar,” 103.
215. Smart, Revolutionary Theology, 28.
216. Busch, Karl Barth: His Life, 83.
217. Here I deal with Marquardt’s report on Barth’s “Socialist Speeches.” Cf. Marquardt, “Erster Bericht über Karl Barths ‘Sozialistische Reden,’” 475–78.
218. Marquardt, “Erster Bericht über Karl Barths ‘Sozialistische Reden,’” 477.
219. Ibid., 477.
220. Ibid.
221. Marquardt, “Aktuar,” 105.
222. Busch, Karl Barth: His Life, 83.
223. Marqurdt, “Erster Bericht über Karl Barths ‘Sozialistische Reden,’” 472–73.
224. Ibid., 482. In Engels’s letter to Joseph Bloch (on 21/22. September 1890): “According to a materialistic interpretation of history, what a moment determines in the last instance in the history is the production and reproduction of actual life. More have neither Marx nor I ever insisted . . . The economic situation is the basis, but the various moments of superstructure . . . exercise also the development in the process of historical struggles and decide predominantly in many cases its form. It is an interaction of all those moments, in which lastly through the infinite amount of accidents . . . the economic movement asserts itself as the necessary thing” (MEW 37:463ff.).
225. Gollwitzer, “Kingdom of God and Socialism in the Theology of Karl Barth,” 102. In examining carefully Barth’s “Socialist Speeches,” this runs counter to McCormack’s hunch—“If Barth did study Marxist literature, it was sometimes after 1917, and even then, there is no primary source evidence which would confirm such a hypothesis” (McCormack, Critically Realistic, 88, fn. 27).
226. Gollwitzer, “Kingdom of God and Socialism in the Theology of Karl Barth,” 85.
227. Thurneysen, Karl Barth “Theologie und Sozialismus” in den Briefen seiner Frühzeit, 9.
228. Smart, Revolutionary Theology, 36.
229. Busch, Karl Barth: His Life, 103–4.
230. Thurneysen’s response is different. “When I observe the signs of enjoyment at my local tavern on Saturday evening, I see the same picture. That Hochuli makes the offer in this case is in so far no basic difference, as the people will have their feast, and take it where they can get it. All of this can only strengthen you in your appeal to the little flock.” B-Th I, 123.
231. Marquardt, “Aktuar,” 134.
232. Thurneysen, Karl Barth ‘Theologie und Sozialismus,’ 29.
233. Smart, Revolutionary Theology, 31.
234. Marquardt, Theologie und Sozialismus, 83. In the interpretation of Marquardt, Kutter’s living God was philosophically rather than biblically grounded, while Ragaz’s kingdom of God arose from political principles rather than from Scripture (ibid., 49).
235. Busch, Karl Barth: His Life, 92.
236. Barth, “Righteousness of God,” 9.
