Barth and Thurneysen have done much to acquaint the English reader with the religious ideas of the movement. They have demonstrated that this theology can be translated into soul-searching, pungent sermons, which is ever the final test of any theological system.
This volume is not presented as a complete system of Barthian theology. Nevertheless, the table of contents will show that the subjects have been selected with a view to presenting the main theological contributions which Barth has made to our generation. The selection was made from a series of brochures, published under the title of Theologische Existenz Heute, edited by Karl Barth and Eduard Thurneysen. These brochures are mostly lectures delivered before eager groups of ministers, and addresses and sermons before large audiences. They are, therefore, not merely the academic product of the professor’s sanctum but issue from the battlefront of an intense religious struggle, at a time when it is not “all quiet on the western front.” The chapter on the Church reveals with refreshing clarity Barth’s position in the German church conflict. He simply holds to a definite conception of the Church. He does not antagonize any form or theory of government. He is not crusading against socialism or communism. He is not concerned with theories of government or policies of administration but with God and His Church. His Church stands there like a rock in a surging sea. It may be a storm center; the roar of many waters may resound mightily; the foamy billows may rise high, and even for a time submerge it; all this not because the rock has gone out to battle the sea but because the sea has struck something solid.
Those who grasp Barth’s ideas regarding Revelation, the Church, the Christian Ministry, etc., will see why one cannot properly speak of “Barthianism” or a “Barthian School.” The whole emphasis is on something beyond Barth or any group of men. Barth is a witness to the truth and a witness is of only relative significance.
But it is not the purpose of the introduction to interpret Barth or the contents of this book. The important thing is that Barth here speaks for himself. There is good reason to believe that the English-speaking public will be glad for the opportunity to hear him. The translators, as well as the author, have no other aim than to bear witness to the truth, for the glory of God.
JOSIAS FRIEDLI.
Mission House, 1935.
WE CANNOT speak of revelation without being made immediately aware of two other concepts which are closely related to it. They are the concepts of testimony and confession. We would not know of revelation if it did not come to us by way of testimony concerning it. I mean by this the word and the spirit of the apostles and prophets as they live in the Holy Scriptures. The Church is founded on revelation through the medium of the testimony of those who have heard and seen it. In faith we can have knowledge of it, and speak of it for the very reason that this testimony exists. To receive and accept revelation means, then, to receive and accept this testimony. And this in turn constitutes confession. We cannot speak of revelation as we speak of the results of philosophic reflections on ourselves and on the presuppositions of our existence, or as we speak of discoveries in the spheres of nature and history. We cannot maintain its reality and truth as if we had discovered it, and as if we could establish its validity. We can only receive, accept, and acknowledge it on the ground of the testimony concerning it which has created the Church, and still preserves it, and in which it, namely, revelation, meets us in its own power, credibility, and authority.
Let me elucidate in a parable the relation of the three concepts of revelation, testimony, and confession; and chiefly the reality and truth of what we are to understand by revelation.
On the battlefield (namely, not in a study, nor on a stage but on the battlefield of human life) it has happened (it has indubitably and irrevocably happened with the complete, once-for-all singularity [Einmaligkeit] and with the whole gravity of a factual event) that the enemy (the enemy, the other one, not man himself but his opponent, an adversary who is determined to engage man) with overwhelming superiority (the event is caused by his intention and disposition and not by man’s) has gone into action (we are not asked if and how we intend to come to grips with him, for the engagement is in full swing). This event is God’s revelation to man; and whoever fails to understand it in this manner does not know what he is saying when he takes the word revelation on his lips.
But let us continue the parable. From the troop which occupies the front line (it is not a group of poets and thinkers, nor are they men who have time and leisure to meditate on the things of man, nor are they men engaged with their own deeds and sufferings; rather, they are fighting men who are compelled to face this enemy) comes the report (not a theoretical system, nor an esthetic appreciation, nor a work program but a hasty and urgent report) of the fact of this attack (not of the well-being or ill-being of the fighting men, nor of the existence and nature of the enemy but simply of the fact: we have been attacked) to reenforcements who are standing in readiness immediately behind the front line (not to a group of journalists or other battlefield loafers but to a troop not unlike the men of the first line which is destined to engage the enemy and appointed to give battle). The group whom the enemy has already attacked are the prophets and apostles; and their report to the other group which is standing behind the front line prepared to reenforce them is the Holy Scripture. Whoever fails to understand these men and this book in such a manner does not have a truly realistic understanding of them.
We bring the parable to a close. The arrival of their report is to those standing in the rear a quite self-evident signal (a discussion of the practical importance of this report is quite excluded) of the necessity (not of a possibility but of the necessity which finds expression in immediate and definite commands) to arise, take up arms, form into line, and march to the front (all this the more quickly and energetically, the more overwhelming the superiority of the attacking enemy and the greater the danger which is threatening from the front line.)
These reenforcements whom the report from the front line has called up is the Church which hears the Holy Scripture. The moment of the call, and thus of decision, resolution, command, and obedience is the moment in which we stand: the moment of confession. We are called to hasten to the place where the prophets and apostles are making their stand. They are standing face to face with the coming GOD. They call us to their side; not for their own sake but for the sake of God. The troop which has heard them and sets out in their direction is the Church, the confessing Church. A Church which has an understanding of its existence and nature different from the one here indicated would be an uninteresting affair.
In making use of this parable, I do not lay claim to originality. It is possible to speak in an original manner on every subject in the whole wide world except this one. Of this subject it is possible only to speak faithfully, i.e., exegetically. With what I have said, I merely have tried to restate how the prophets and apostles, how the Church fathers and reformers understood the testimony of the Bible, and how we ourselves must understand the Church and the confession, and thus also ourselves, if we are to remain in line with them.
For a beginning we shall pass up what will need to be said concerning the concepts of testimony and confession, and proceed to fix some propositions which have validity if, in conformity with prophets and apostles, revelation is understood to be an event of the free and sovereign activity of God toward man.
What will knowledge of revelation mean then? Four points will be seen to be fundamental.
1. Knowledge of revelation does not always begin with clarity. It may increase in clarity; it should do so. It may, however, diminish also in clarity. But under all circumstances, it begins with certitude. Either God has spoken or He has not spoken.
