Barth on Dogmatics--Commentary 3

“There would be no dogmatics and there would perhaps be no theology at all, unless the Church’s task consisted centrally in the proclamation of the Gospel in witness to the Word spoken by God.”

“Exactly halfway between exegesis and practical theology stands dogmatics…”

“In dogmatics our question is: What are we to think and say (and do)?”

I add the “and do” to the last quotation because, historically, the Church has gotten so tied up in what it says without backing up what is said by actions. I believe that this is what Barth is after in his work: the answer the question “How is it we should live?”

The initial form of the question fits more into the historical discussion of theology and dogmatics, but I believe this is the reason why we have focused on developing programs within the Church and not with developing missional activity. I define missional activity as living in a way that reveals the “image of God.”

This to me is what “the proclamation of the Gospel in witness” is all about. It is about living…which includes both speaking and acting. And, I believe, that by acting in a way that is more consistent with our speaking is a more powerful message than just telling other people what our message is. I believe that this is what Barth is telling us.

From this, one can interpret the statement that dogmatics is “halfway” between exegesis and practical theology. Exegesis can be defined as “explanation and critical interpretation” of, in this case, “the Word spoken by God.”

Princeton Theological Seminary has a Department of Practical Theology. This is what the Seminary has to say about practical theology and the mission of this department: “The Seminary’s mission is to prepare women and men to serve Jesus Christ in ministries marked by faith, integrity, scholarship, competence, compassion, and joy, equipping them for leadership worldwide in congregations and the larger church, in classrooms and the academy, and in the public arena.” That is, practical theology has to do with “where the rubber hits the road.”

If dogmatics is “exactly halfway” between exegesis and practical theology then one can see dogmatics at taking the model of the Church and transforming it into practice.

I use the term “model” here because “model building” is exactly what people do when they construct a “worldview” and that is what people, pupils or teachers, do when they go about exegesis. These people attempt to “explain” and “critically interpret” the Word of God. That is, they are building a “model”.

This model can, and should, be used in problem solving and decision making. That is what humans do best. A model is something that helps us to solve more and more difficult problems and to make better decisions.

Dogmatics represents an attempt to take a model and turn it into the proclamation of God so that it is used in solving problems and making decisions. Exegesis can become sterile and “other-worldly”. It can become useless in the sense that it bears no relationship to the lives that people have to live.

Dogmatics, as Barth is defines it, seeks to keep the proclamation of God relevant to lives, to make it useful, to change lives.

The proclamation of God has to do with what we do. Therefore, it must be alive and vital and meaningful. If the proclamation of God becomes irrelevant to the needs of people to problem solve and make decisions in the world they live in, they will seek other “models”.

Barth writes, “Outwardly, dogmatics arises from the fact that the Church’s proclamation is in danger of going astray. Dogmatics is the testing of Church doctrine and proclamation.”

We must continually “test” the relationship between exegesis and practical theology.

“The correction, the deepening, the increasing precision of what is taught in our Church can only be God’s own work although not apart from man’s effort. “

Thus, the question must always be, “What is the evidence?”

“Not the evidence of my thoughts, or my heart, but the evidence of the apostles and prophets, as the evidence of God’s self-evidence.”

I like the phrase that Stanley Hauerwas used for the title of his Gifford lectures, “With the Grain of the Universe.” This, to me, gives us the ultimate test of the proclamation of the Gospel. God’s Word should bring us into greater unity with His creation. If our speech and our actions conform with God’s Word then we should be in unity with His creation and we should feel this because our actions are “with the grain of the universe.” We are moving “with” creation and are not acting “across the grain” of the universe.

If our actions are not with the grain of the universe…we become dis-satisfied, and anxious and, sometimes, alienated. Things just don’t feel right.

This is why our “practical theology” must be in line with our exegesis. This is why we must continually test the waters. And, in this sense, this is why “dogmatics” is pragmatic. It must work. It must bring into alignment with the grain of the universe.

Models are abstractions. Yes, we believe that we have received “the Word of God,” but explaining the Word of God and critically interpreting how it can be put into practice depends upon human beings. And, human beings never have the luxury to work with “complete information.” That is, humans never have the whole story.

Thus, our models, which are abstractions, are partial and therefore ultimately fallible. We must continually test our models and test the results of applying our models. This, I believe, is what Barth is teaching us. We must continually bridge the gap between exegesis and our actions. To Barth, dogmatics is the way that we do this.