Daniel Kirk is hosting a virtual Karl Barth reading group in which I hope to participate. We’re commenting this week on section 1.1 of the Church Dogmatics. I had started reading the Dogmatics this past summer so I’m looking forward to this group interaction.
Barth defines “dogmatics” as follows: “[a]s a theological discipline dogmatics is the scientific self-examination of the Christian Church with respect to the content of its distinctive talk about God.”
I love this definition because it lays some important groundwork. First, dogmatics is a sort of “science.” That is, dogmatics seeks to explain some aspect of reality. It gets at the essences of the way things really are.
Second, dogmatics is an act of “self examination.” The theme of ever and always getting back to the sources, of critically reappraising our thinking about God, is important to Barth’s project. The theological task never ends.
Third, dogmatics is distinctively situated within the Christian Church. The “science” of dogmatics is not like the supposedly neutral, objective enterprise of the natural or social sciences. Rather, dogmatics asserts its own grounds and grammar, ultimately based in revelation. As we’ll see, Barth’s doctrine of revelation is both objective and dynamic, rooted ultimately in God’s Triune person.
For Barth, the science of dogmatics “does not have to justify itself” before other sciences that proceed according to their own methods. This will prove to be, I think, a great strength and a potential weakness in Barth’s project. Christian theology cannot submit to any standard as final arbiter of its claims other than God’s revelation in Christ, or else it will lose its integrity. As we move through the Dogmatics, however, we may want to modify or soften some of Barth’s opposition to some kinds of natural theology.
A good conclusion to this brief introduction is the definition of who is a “theologian,” quoted from Johannes Coccejus: “A theologian is someone who speaks of God, from God, before God to God’s glory.” May it be so!