Karl Barth...

The Life and Theology of Karl Barth
David Manning
Church History
July 16, 2006


Karl Barth was one of the most influential and intelligent minds in all of church history. According to many, he ranks among such men as Augustine, Luther, and Calvin. Even Pope Pius XII called him the most important theologian since Thomas Aquinas.

Karl Barth was born in 1886 and lived until December 10th 1968. He was a Swiss Reformed theologian and a leading thinker in the Neo-Orthodox movement. From 1911 to 1921, Barth was a pastor in Safenwil. After Safenwil, he went on to be professor of theology at Gottingen, Munster and Bonn. In 1935, Barth was forced to leave Germany because he refused to sign allegiance to Adolf Hitler. After departing the country, he became a theology professor in Basel Switzerland.

Originally a theological liberal, Barth’s personal theology made a progressive change to a form of orthodox conservatism as he experienced the horrific realities of human depravity during World War I and was greatly disturbed by the union of his liberal colleagues to Hitler during World War II.

Barth’s theology can be described as Trinitarian and Christocentric in nature, and social in application. He saw no distinction between theology and practice, since to know God is to do His will. Barth sought a return to orthodox theology with an emphasis on the eternal Word – Jesus Christ. He tried to define all of theology through the lense of Christ and the Trinity.

Karl Barth’s theology of election is one of his most notable, and original, positions. According to Barth, God has, from the foundations of the world, elected Jesus Christ as the chosen one. Also from before time, God ordained that humanity should partake of this grace of election in Christ. God ordained that Christ would suffer the rejection of humanity, while humans could benefit from the election of Christ by becoming in Christ through faith in Him. Thus, by being joined to Jesus Christ, humans are then referred to as elect. Barth’s position was that Calvinism and Arminianism were both theologies of Creation, whereas election is a doctrine of Christ. As such, election should always be focused on Jesus, not the creatures that are privileged to be partakers of divine election.

While Karl Barth has been commended by many, there are some within conservative Christianity that still have some reservations about him. This is mostly due to his position on the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture. Barth saw only Christ as God’s revelation, not Scripture. Jesus is the eternal Word of God. The Bible is written by men and should not be the bedrock of our faith – God’s revelation in Christ should be. While God speaks to us through Scripture, and thus it becomes the word of God to us, Scripture itself is not God’s word. This doctrine has made many conservatives uneasy about endorsing Barth, but on the whole, his theology should be seen as very much in line with orthodox Christianity.

A prolific writer, two of Barth’s most important works are The Epistle to the Romans and Church Dogmatics. The former is his commentary of the book of Romans. The latter is an exhaustive treatise on theology that he wrote over the course of many years. It is the largest set of systematic theology every written. Barth originally intended for Church Dogmatics to be a five volume set divided into many sub-parts, but he died before he could even finish volume four. Since each volume is usually divided into many sub-volumes, we usually count Church Dogmatics to be a thirteen volume set!

Ultimately, Karl Barth has been to the twentieth century what Augustine was to the early church and Luther and Calvin were to the church of the Reformation. His works have been, and will continue to be, some of the most influential and thought provoking writings of students of Christianity everywhere.

Neo-Evangelicalism - A Short Report

Neo-Evangelicalism
David Manning
Church History
July 16, 2006


My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one … As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world (John 17:16, 18).


Ever since Jesus prayed these words, the church has swung, as if on a pendulum, from wholehearted commitment to living them out to complete and total isolation. It seems that second only to church unity, the cultural involvement of the church has been one of the most continuous conflicts throughout its history.

In the early nineteen hundreds, a movement called fundamentalism was started. Fundamentalism was a response to the liberalism developing in the church. It sought the restoration of belief in the miraculous, including the inerrancy of the Scriptures, the virgin birth, the substitutionary death and resurrection of Christ, and the second coming of Christ. Fundamentalism also vehemently opposed evolution.

While this movement was a good thing for theology, it ultimately ended up leading to a reclusive mentality. Fundamentalists ceased to engage the culture and turned inward. Instead of being in the world and protected from the evil one, as Christ prayed, they withdrew from the world to “flee” the evil one.

In the mid-nineteen forties, another movement called Neo-Evangelicalism began developing. This was largely in response to a book written by Carl Henry entitled The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism. In this book, Henry challenged that fundamentalism hit the nail on the head when it came to theology, but totally missed the boat when it came to engaging culture. By becoming separatistic and withdrawing, fundamentalsim no longer spoke to the questions and needs of society. Neo-Evangelicals sought to bring the gospel back into the world that it might have an impact on society.

There were many different paths to bringing this about. One included the return of many conservative individuals back to mainline denominations and teaching institutions. One such example is E.J. Carnell who studied at Westminster but returned to Princeton to argue for theologically conservative positions. It was this re-engagement of society and culture that marked Neo-Evangelicalism.

The church I attend is Covenant Baptist Church of Marengo, Illinois. At Covenant, our approach is near identical to the Neo-Evangelical idea of in but not of. Our mission is to “Bring the love of Jesus Christ into the everyday lives of all people.” Our church maintains a base of theological conservativism. That being said, we also believe in Christian conscience and freedom. We do not regulate behavior where the Scriptures are silent. We do, however, seek to elevate conscience and brotherly love in our actions.

When it comes to culture and society, we engage wholheartedly – so long as we do not partake in sin. It is our desire to reach those within our families, jobs, schools, and neighborhoods with the gospel. We try to bring biblical answers to the questions asked by those in the community around us. In all this, we maintain our theologically conservative base.

The church has had a tough time throughout its history getting this equation right (in but not of). If there were ever a time when I think there is hope for our impact on culture and society, while maintaining sound theology, I believe that time is now.

A Short Review of Three Chapters From the Institutes...

The Institutes of Christian Religion: A Response to Three Chapters
Church History
David J. Manning
July 9, 2006


The Institutes of Christian Religion, by John Calvin, is one of the most monumental, and influential, works in Christian history. Calvin’s writings stand among those of the early church fathers, Augustine, Aquinas, and Luther. In this short paper, I intend to respond to a few ideas posited by Calvin in three chapters found in The Institutes: chapter fourteen, The Sacraments; chapter fifteen, Baptism; and chapter sixteen, Infant Baptism.

In chapter fourteen, Calvin introduces us to the definition of a sacrament. He says that a sacrament is “God’s witness to us of his favour towards us, by means of an outward sign … From these definitions, we can see that there cannot be a sacrament without a prior promise. The sacrament simply confirms the promise … The sacraments make God’s promises come alive to us, by presenting them in a pictorial, visible form … Of course the believer does not stop short at the visible sign, but rises to the sublime mysteries which lie hidden in the sacrament.” Finally, Calvin states “The sacraments have the same function as God’s Word: they offer Christ to us, and in him, the treasures of grace,” (Lane 253-256)

Having grown up Baptist, I had never had much exposure to teachings on the sacraments, or ordinances as we called them. They were simply memorials or acts of obedience we were to follow. About a year and a half ago, I was challenged to look into the sacraments more deeply. I have since found Calvin’s position on the sacraments (and hence the Reformed position on the sacraments) to make the most sense biblically and historically. Since God’s relationship with humankind has played out historically in the covenants (which have their basis in the suzerainty covenant models) the idea of signs and seals seem to make the most sense. Calvin rightly emphasizes sacraments as physical aspects of spiritual promises. They are not the promises themselves, but they cannot be divorced from the promises either.

In chapter fifteen, Calvin describes baptism as a means to “encourage faith in [Jesus] and also as a way of confessing it before others.” He then goes on to say “Baptism is a sign of cleansing…Those who see baptism only as confession of our faith have missed the main point. Baptism is tied to the promise of forgiveness,” (Lane 256). Calvin also links baptism with “our dying in Christ and new life in him,” (258) Ultimately, baptism is “the sign of initiation by which we are admitted to the fellowship of the Church.”

I wholeheartedly agree. Baptism is more than an act of obedience or an outward profession of an inward faith. It is a sign and seal of God’s covenant promises to us, including forgiveness of sin, regeneration, connection to the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, and the circumcision of the sinful nature. Baptism is less about the Christian and his or her faith and more about God and his promises made to us in the covenant of grace.

Baptism is the rite of conversion or, as I like to refer to it as, the conversion in the flesh. We may experience our conversion spiritually, and receive forgiveness of sins and the spiritual aspects of the covenant, but is not completed until it is done so in the body in baptism. Baptism ratifies the promises made by God in the covenant to us.

Finally, in chapter 16, Calvin discusses infant baptism. As a Baptist, it would be expected for me to have ardent objections at this point. That simply is not the situation. I am convinced that a strong case can be made biblically and historically for infant baptism. I am also convinced that a strong case can be made biblically and historically for believer’s baptism. Ultimately, I choose to remain Baptist for a few reasons: tradition, comfort, and a nagging understanding of Jeremiah 31.

In Jeremiah 31:31-34, God is speaking of the New Covenant he will form with Israel. Members of the New Covenant will not have to teach their neighbors to “know the LORD” because they will all already “know the LORD.” It seems to me that the New Covenant will be made up of believers. That being the case, the initiatory sign and seal of the New Covenant, baptism, should be administered to believers only. Since it is quite difficult to comprehend of infants having saving faith, the church should wait until a credible profession of faith is made before the sign and seal is applied to an individual.

I am quite aware of the fact that paedobaptists do have a response to this position, and I am currently working through it, but at least for now, my understanding of Jeremiah is as previously stated. In that regard, I have to disagree with Calvin on the issue of infant baptism. However, I seek to disagree with him, and with all paedobaptists, in Christian charity and understanding, rather than condemnation and division.




Works Cited
Lane, Tony, and Osborne, Hilary. John Calvin: The Institutes of Christian Religion. The Baker Publishing Group, 1987.

A Short Report On the English Reformation

Webquest: The English Reformation
Church History
June 25, 2006
David J. Manning

The English Reformation is a perfect example of how God’s hand of providence can turn the sinful actions of one man into a source of good for a great many people. Up until the time of Henry VIII, England had been a Catholic country. At times there were dissenters, but for the most part, England’s religion belonged to Rome. Henry VIII even earned himself the title “Defender of the Faith” from the Pope for writing The Assertion of the Seven Sacraments in opposition to Luther.

Though Henry was a staunch Catholic, he was without a male heir and felt compelled to produce one. His wife Catherine of Aragon had only provided him with a female heir (Mary), which left the king in a quandry. The only way the king could marry another woman, in this case Anne of Boleyn, was to be granted a divorce. Since his wife Catherine was previously married to his older brother Arthur, Henry argued that his marriage should be declared null and he be allowed to marry Anne of Beleyn. The Pope was rather reluctant to grant the request, however, because Charges V, Catherine’s nephew, was emperor of the Holy Roman Empire.

In 1533 Henry VIII appointed Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury. The new archbishop swiftly granted Henry his divorce. In 1534 the Act of Supremacy was passed, declaring the king to be the only supreme head of the Church of England, thus solidifying England’s separation from Rome. The Protestants’ hopes were furthered by the religious convictions of Anne, who was a Catholic, but with an eye towards major reform.

Anne of Boleyn was put to death in 1536 for adultery and treason (questionable charges), but the English Reformation continued. Between 1536 and 1539, the English monastaries were dissolved and their properties confiscated. Many of these monastic properties were sold back to church clergy, thus solidifying Protestantism’s hold on England. Doctrinal development was put on hold, however, in 1539 when the Act of Six Articles was issued. This Act essentially halted doctrinal reform, though it would later be repealed under Edward VI.

Doctrinally, the Church of England did not differ much from Catholicism – at least at first. In the beginning, most changes were hierarchial, above what the average church attender would notice. The services were still very Catholic in format, though eventually they were to be performed in English. Also, every church was to be supplied with its own copy of the Scriptures. Eventually, altars, images, and even some stained glass were done away with.

One of the greatest influences on the protestant Church of England was Thomas Cranmer. Cranmer was a member of the White Horse Group (a group, named after a pub in Cambridge, which discussed and debated the various issues of Protestantism). Cranmer was named the first protestant Archbishop of Canterbury. His greatest impact on the church was the Book of Common Prayer – a book of liturgy designed for church worship. Also contained in the book were the 39 Articles – basically a detailed profession of faith.

Henry VIII married Anne of Cleaves in 1540, though the couple did not last long. Henry found her distasteful and almost immediately sought a divorce. Anne of Cleaves was hoped to be one who would push for more protestant reforms, especially from a Lutheran vantage point. This never happened, and Anne eventually converted to Catholicism under the reign of Mary.

In 1540 Henry married Catherine Howard, a Catholic. This slowed reformational progress up a bit, but did not reverse the trends altogether. This marriage lasted about two years after which, in an ironic twist, the queen was put to death for infidelity, the very thing Henry had been guilty of multiple times throughout his reign. Henry was adulterous, immoral, and religiously wanting. He used the church as a tool for his own purposes and left many in his family in disarray. The endless flip flopping between Catholic and protestant tendancies left the common people of England divided and bitter.

In 1547 King Henry VIII died. Edward VI, a firm protestant, became his heir at age ten. Edward reigned until his death in 1553. Soon after, Mary ascended the throne and attempted to return England to its Catholic roots. Her persecution of Protestants, including the burning of over three hundred of them, earned her the title “Bloody Mary.” Two most notable martyrs were Thomas Cranmer and Hugh Latimer (Bishop of Worchester and supporter of Henry’s divorce to Catherine of Aragon). She died in 1558. She was succeeded by her sister Elizabeth, whose forty five year reign became a stabilizing factor in the country, and allowed for Protestantism’s permanent grasp on England.