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!
The need for order and structure in the world is obvious
when human behavior is observed and understood. Sin and evil desires tread
relentlessly in the lives of all humanity, making the effort of morality appear
as a hopeless cause. Guidelines are prominent for humanity’s survival and the
Command of God fulfills the need for an appropriate set of order in the world.
The Command of God acts as a gift from God of divine wisdom, given to humanity
to ensure safety and relationship of people and God. Following the Command of
God is the avenue in which humanity remembers the Lord, and the mighty acts of
the past that God has completed on behalf of His people. This demands that the
Command of God should be respected and honored. It is evident in Karl Barth’s
Church Dogmatic series that the Command of God is to be strongly considered and
reflected upon in the light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and followed as best
as possible.
Nevertheless,
for Barth there is a part of the Command of God that is not the be-all end-all
that has traditionally surrounded the Command of God.[1] That is to say, there is a rare chance that
there can be an exception to the Command of God. Barth even goes so far to say
that the exception to the Command of God is also ordered by God; but only when
it is commanded by God is it acceptable to act in exception to the original
Command. How is this possible? If the Command of God is the order and structure
humanity needs to survive on this earth and provides the avenue of relationship
to God, then how can it be possible that there can be an exception to the
Command? In my paper I wish to examine Barth’s idea of the Command of God, more
specifically, what about the Command of God allows for the “exceptional
case”. I will do this by focusing on his
section “Protection of Life” and his analysis of the Command “thou shall not
kill”.
We
must first gain a deeper understanding of what Barth’s feeling are on the
literal meaning of the Biblical Commandment “thou shall not kill.” The Command
to not kill, given to humanity, means a person is not to become the murderer of
another person. Barth sees this as a sort of a protection of human life against
extinction.[2]
It is essential, in attempting to understand Barth’s own view of the Command
“thou shall not kill”, to keep in mind that Barth is a major advocate of the
view that human life is a loan from God and therefore demands respect. Thus,
the protection of human life has its inner norm in the will of God the Creator.[3] This protection is not unlimited or absolute,
but is simply the protection which God wills.[4]
Barth understands human life as having no greatness on its own regard, but the
Command of God is where the protection and value of life derives. In the
extreme exceptional case, Barth believes that “it cannot be excluded that God
may further the protection (of a person) through termination (of another
person) rather than preservation of their life.[5]”
Nevertheless, there should be no indifference in relation to human life that is
allowed in any circumstances to replace the obligatory will to protect it.[6]
[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. 398
[2] Barth,
Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 p. 397
[3] Barth,
Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 p. 398
[4] Barth,
Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 p. 397
[5] Barth,
Karl. Church Dogmatics; Volume 3,the Doctrine of Creation, Part 4 p. 398
No comments:
Post a Comment