Collins, Trinitarian Theology East and West. Karl Barth, the Cappadocian Fathers, and John Zizioulas

2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 171-173
Author(s):  
Aidan Nichols
2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 278-290
Author(s):  
Adam McIntosh

Although Karl Barth is widely recognised as the initiator of the renewal of trinitarian theology in the twentieth century, his theology of the Church Dogmatics has been strongly criticised for its inadequate account of the work of the Holy Spirit. This author argues that the putative weakness of Barth's pneumatology should be reconsidered in light of his doctrine of appropriation. Barth employs the doctrine of appropriation as a hermeneutical procedure, within his doctrine of the Trinity, for bringing to speech the persons of the Trinity in their inseparable distinctiveness. It is argued that the doctrine of appropriation provides a sound interpretative framework for his pneumatology of the Church Dogmatics.


2010 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark J. McInroy

AbstractScholarship on Karl Barth's engagement with so-called ‘personalist philosophy’ has claimed that the following three sources exerted a significant influence on this aspect of Barth's thought: (1) the founders of an interdisciplinary society known as the ‘Patmos Circle’; (2) Barth's fellow dialectical theologians, Emil Brunner and Friedrich Gogarten; (3) Martin Buber, in particular his classic work, I and Thou. In spite of these assessments, however, I argue that Barth's initial stance towards personalism is actually best characterised as one of resistance and criticism. Specifically, I claim here that Barth undertakes a highly critical appropriation of personalism in which the categories of encounter (Begegnung), co-humanity (Mitmenschlichkeit) and the I–Thou relation (Ich–Du-Beziehung) are deeply criticised and recast in an explicitly theological – not philosophical – mould. When Barth does use personalist categories in his own theological anthropology – particularly in the Church Dogmatics, III/2 – he roots his notion of the human being as a ‘being in encounter’ in his christology and trinitarian theology, comprehensively restructuring personalist categories by placing them on a new foundation.


2007 ◽  
Vol 100 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Behr

In his work, Nicaea and Its Legacy, Lewis Ayres raises a number of issues important to the discipline of theology. The first is simply the difficulty of studying the past, especially the fourth century, one of the key periods in the formation of Christian theology. Reading texts from fifteen hundred years ago is sufficiently challenging, but these texts are set in a very complex history (or histories) of theological, social and imperial controversies and transitions. Then there is the task of relating the study of historical theology to modern systematic theology, knowing that simply retelling the history more thoroughly will not solve or resolve modern issues, for they have their own complicated genealogy. There is also the need to be aware of the involvement of different exegetical practices and presuppositions—then and now—in all of this. Finally, and most broadly or ecumenically, there are the implications that such work now has for dialogue between “Western” and “Eastern” trinitarian theology, and the questionable usefulness of such categories. That Ayres has remained sensitive to these, and other, dimensions of difficulty, while also engaging with a substantial body of literature, numerous primary texts, and diverse secondary texts (if that is still a useful distinction) makes his work both challenging and significant.


1990 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 415-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl E. Braaten

The thesis is that the current renewal of trinitarian theology is a crucial resource for stimulating the quest for Christian unity and the mission of the church. The roots of the new trinitarianism lie in the thought of Karl Barth, a Protestant, and Karl Rahner, a Roman Catholic. This approach stands in diametrical opposition to the pluralistic theology of religions advocated by some Protestant and Catholic theologians. Sometimes called a “Copernican revolution,” the pluralistic model cuts the nerve of the church's mission by relativizing the uniqueness of Christ and the gospel.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document