Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T20:23:22.660Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Providence: An Account of Karl Barth's Doctrine1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2009

Extract

Here is the eleventh Kapitel of Barth' Dogmatik, and the entitles it The Creator and His creation. Its three great themes are: God's Fatherly Providence, the “Negation” (Chaos or Void) of which He rules and against whose opposition He safeguards His creatures, and the ministry of angels. Before he passes on from the first to the second article of the creed, Barth promises a further Kapitel dealing with the ethical doctrine which rests on our understanding of God as Creator. The doctrine which he has to expound and establish in this sector of the theological field is at once the most familiar and the least secure element in the Christian outlook of modern men. We all know the kind of thing we are expected to say about God's Fatherly care. Professor Farmer's book, The World and God, gave substantial help towards saying it in the modern climate of thought. But there are plenty of signs that Christians tremble in face of the obligation to relate the vast and complex range of experience to the action of God. It becomes increasingly difficult to speak as though the wealth and variety of cosmic reality can be intelligibly related to the God who reveals Himself in Jesus Christ and to the action which He takes at that focal point. And what one expected from Barth was a rethinking of the doctrine of Providence on a Christological basis. What he has to say is not excitingly novel.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Scottish Journal of Theology Ltd 1951

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 243 note 1 The term Das Nichtige is not readily translated into English. I imagine that “the Void” would convey its sense to those familiar with existentialist thinking. My wife, who neither knows German nor is a theologian, suddenly came to my rescue with “chaotic insubstantiality”, which deserves, I think, to be placed on record. After all, she knows more about it than I do (cf. Gen. 3.1).