Barth series part 2 of 7 (On suicide)

Introduction: 

During my second year of Seminary, I had the pleasure of taking a yearlong “theology and ethics of Karl Barth” course at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary taught by Dr. John Burgess.  The year accounted for three credits hours in which we covered Karl Barth’s “Church Dogmatics Volume 3: The Doctrine of Creation Part 4.” The setup of the class was to read anywhere from 25-40 pages of Barth a week and produce a detailed outline of the material in the readings. We then would meet once a week to discuss the readings. At the end of the course, we were asked to prepare a 20-page paper that covered a main theme in the Church Dogmatics Volume. This series of blogs consists of sections from my paper that I wrote for the course. As you will see in the posts, I was specifically impressed by Barth’s discussion of ethical issues in the light of the Command of God and what he calls the exceptional case to that command. There are many other things that I loved in this volume that are not covered in these post, and I am in no way claiming to have fully comprehend what Barth is getting at, I just want to share some of my thoughts in hope to continue my theological pursuit after seminary!

Series introduction HERE

The first ethical case that will be discussed arises from the question: does the Command of God give freedom for man to take his own life? The Command that a person should protect human life (Thou shall not kill) surely should apply to a person’s own life. But, Barth also seems to suggest that a person may be forbidden to will life’s continuation.[1] The freedom of the Command of God means that God may demand such an exception. Barth appears to believe that for a person to seek to continue living at all cost, even against the Command of God could be a sinful and rebellious desire.[2]  Therefore, it may be that a person is called to offer their self.[3] This suggests that Barth agrees there is some type of honorable sacrifice which aligns with the Command of God. However, Barth rejects the view that a person can freely dispose of their life by their own will.[4] Even so, Barth does not see suicide as an unforgivable sin.[5]  Barth’s view of suicide is immersed in his reformed tradition. Not only does Barth describe suicide by reminding his reader that God sees and weighs the whole human life and not just one individual action, but he explains that there is no circumstance in which humanity is saved by works or their own actions as opposed to faith.[6]  This includes suicide. Thus, it is not correct to make a definitive statement about the subject of suicide and the eternal outcome of that decision. Barth also believes there could be a time when self-destruction equals self-offering.[7]  However, Barth would push vigorously for a person to withhold from such an action. The Command of God calls for respect of life, which is a gift from God. Barth is clear that he feels, in every case, Christians must avoid any arbitrary denial of the possibility of the exception.[8] 

Brief thoughts on Barth’s suggestions:

This is a remarkable approach to the ethical issue of suicide. Before coming in contact with Barth’s text, I was led to believe that the act of suicide was unforgivable due to selfishness and the fact that the last action of the person was a sin. But Barth calls us to bring to mind reformed theology and its confession that it is only by faith that we are saved not by works or individual actions. Thus, we as Christian must be careful to place such a graceless punishment on any one single action. I do not believe Barth is giving a free pass to someone who may take their own life. On the contrary, the command of God and the demand that “thou shall not kill” calls for respect of human life. And it is no hidden fact that Karl Barth is a big advocate of the following of the command of God; however he is an equal advocate of following the living and active God as he commands his people through their daily lives. The two must be continually weighed and evaluated through prayer and discernment to ensure that the Christian understands and follows the command of God. 

---

[1]Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3, the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4, Edited by G.W / Bromiley and T.F. Torrance. S.l.: T. & t. Clark, 1961 P. 404

[2] Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 P. 401

[3] Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 P. 401

[4] Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 P. 403

[5] Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 P. 403

[6] Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 P. 405

[7] Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 P. 410

[8] Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 P. 411

The Beauty in Jon Stewart’s and Bill O’ Reilly’s debate

On October 15, 2014 Bill O' Reilly visited Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" to debate whether white privilege is an actual problem in our nation's post-slavery, post-Jim Crow era. As many of you already know Bill O' Reilly is not a fan of the term "white privilege" and even goes so far as to say that it does not exist. Jon Stewart, on the other hand, is a firm believer that white privilege does exist, and holds that it has a significant effect on African-Americans and other people of color. With these differences it is of no surprise that both men are on opposite sides of the political spectrum, and with the popularity of their shows it's safe to say they are main contributors for talking and the rallying point for their liberal and conservative audiences. I say all this to make the point that these two men coming together to discuss something such as white privilege would appear utterly hopeless. Personally, when I clicked the link I could only hope they did not come to blows before the debate was over.

To my surprise, however, as I watched the debate, the two men seemed rational, willing to listen to and understand one another before responding. The purpose of the debate was simple as Stewart informed O'Reilly, "All I want, I want you to admit that there is such a thing as white privilege". As mentioned above this was not something that was going to come easy. O' Reilly brought up the traditional talking points that many conservatives use to combat the idea of white privilege. Things such as, there must be Asian Privilege because Asian American's collectively make more money than white people do, there is no more slavery and the Jim Crow era is over, two of the most powerful figures in the U.S. are President Obama and Oprah Winfrey who are both black, and of course the unforgettable point that if a person works hard and gets an education they can succeed in America.  The reason why these talking points do not necessarily irritated me as a young African American male is because these talking points represent real voices in the U.S. and deserve to be heard and understood. Especially, when taking into account that Bill O' Reilly's "The Factor" is the #1 cable news show on television; therefore an authentic attempt should be made to understand the things that are believed because so many Americans are watching it every day. 

I commend Jon Stewart because instead of writing Bill O' Reilly off as a hopeless lost cause conservative, he actually acknowledges the valued points that O' Reilly made and used that to further state his case on white privilege being a real issue in the U.S today. In the same sense, I comment Bill O' Reilly for not writing Jon Stewart off as an overzealous liberal who has nothing educated to say.  Stewart's argument to O' Reilly was "there has been a systemic systematized subjugation" (in the U.S)… in which though slavery and Jim Crow are dead "the systemic effects of that system exist today." The is very hard for conservatives to understand specifically when they take into account their own lives and how hard they had to work to achieve the success they have obtained.

The term "White Privilege" was not going to work for O' Reilly but the two men ended up agreeing on the fact that the systemic systematized subjugation brought on from slavery and the Jim Crow era is a "factor" in the lives of people of color today. This is huge! As Jon Stewart proclaimed, "This was a beautiful moment in healing." Stewart continues in a comical but genuine tone, "Your humility has healed me… You, You Bill O'Reilly can lead the flock of Fox fearful to a better place, I believe in you." As offensive as the last remark may have been for O' Reilly he took it with a grain of salt and kept with the light comical context of the moment.

While the audience laughed and cheered in awe, what I took from this moment was that it wasn't a win for the left and a loss for the right, neither was it the opposite, but it was a win for the United States of America who is trying to move forward. Both sides were represented equally and respectably. Some headlines will lead you to believe that it was a screaming match or that Bill O' Reilly looked like a complete idiot, but this was by no means the case. The two men sat down and had a passionate conversation in which their voices briefly rose, but they came to a comprised agreement based off of trading one word "factor" for another, "Privilege."  Simply by switching up a word, a leap was made towards unity and understanding in this nation. So if you expected me to bash one man or the other you are disappointed. I want to affirm both man and their maturity and humility to sit down with their opponent and have a real dialogue that led to a real solution. Anyone who turns this debate into an avenue to spew hateful remarks about either one of these men is out of line, misinformed and utterly incapable of understanding the true beauty in legitimate debate. Please don't miss the beauty in this moment. I believe that this debate is reason to celebrate. Yes, people will still have their differences, but a landmark was achieved and no negative or misleading headline is going to lead me to miss it. Meaningful discussions such as this is how we as a nation are going to continue to move forward!

Spiritual value is more than a number

As Christ followers, there are some basic biblical principles regarding the worth of individual lives (and souls) that we have come to accept, fight for, and that shapes our entire outlook on the world. We have come to understand that every human life has meaning, because our life is not an accidental occurrence orchestrated by chances, but a prized gift given by a loving gracious God. Thus, as our depraved soul drives us to hate and wish harm on others, it is the gospel and God's word that reminds us that love and respect is what all people deserve in the world; not because of anything they have done, but for the simple fact that they are a created being of God. 

I was reading "group" magazine a few days ago, and came across a remarkable article challenging the objectification mentality that has been developed in the culture of the U.S. Steven Bonner explains, "Objectification happens when human beings are treated as less than human-- their personhood is depersonalized. The effect? They are reduced to a thing, diminishing the image of God they were created to reflect.[1]" Bonner goes on to suggest that this is what has happened in our society today concerning the assessment of teenagers. He links this unfortunate reality to three major categories, education, youth sports and youth ministry.

Regarding education, Bonner notes how teachers quickly fall into the habit of labeling the good and bad students; putting all their hope in the good students to help them meet their state standardized testing quota. This is not to overlook the fact that some students are better behaved than others, but to challenge the attitude that forces students into a category of what then can, or cannot do for the teacher. Only seeing students in these terms, devalues them as valued human beings and thus goes against the biblical principles we have come to accept as truth. Booner continues along the same line when it comes to Youth Sports and acknowledges how at a very young age kids are learning to find their value in how well they perform, not in the fact that they are a creation of God. 

The category that Booner touches on that really communicates to me is the objectification in youth ministry. Before I get to his discovery I'd like to explain an evaluation I've made at Trinity. It didn't take long for me to receive the question, "how many came last night?". In fact, it happened the day after our first group meeting and a few times the Sunday after our first meeting. To be honest, for a Youth Pastor just beginning, and trying to develop a system, and raise up disciplines, it is extremely frustrating to receive this question numerous times a week. At this point, I am seeking to build a firm base of gospel truths in the few students that God has provided us with, and I feel the students who are here may be being overlooked by the congregation, because of students that have yet to join the group.

I believe Booner explains the danger of this mindset perfectly when he writes, "[As youth pastors] Our promotions are performance- driven—tied to the number of bodies that show up for our events. Our leaders (and our peers) christen us successful if our strategies boost our numbers. So we default to techniques that are beholden to numerical growth more than spiritual growth—and we objectify our students in the process.[2]" I want the ministry that God has blessed me with to value every person in the group. Similar to the Parable of the talents in Matthew 25:14-30, I believe if we are faithful with little God will bless us with however as much as He sees fit in the future. As of now, however, these students that are attending the group (Sunday School and/or Youth Group) every week are amazing. I am amazed at how much they already know and am more than happy to walk with them and teach them more as they grow as Christians. So here's my suggestion, instead of asking how many were at group, ask how have I seen in spiritual growth in my students, ask are the students beginning to understand the Bible more etc. Perhaps then we can see our student's value in the fact that they are a person created and loved by God and not just another number in a big Youth Group.

I'd love to connect with you on twitter: https://twitter.com/DamianLBerry

Reference

Bonner, Steven . "I AM MORE THAN YOU THINK I AM." Group, Mar. - Apr. 2014, 32-37.

Footnotes

---

[1] Bonner, Steven . "I AM MORE THAN YOU THINK I AM." Group, Mar. - Apr. 2014, p.34.

[2] Bonner, Steven . "I AM MORE THAN YOU THINK I AM." Group, Mar. - Apr. 2014, p.35