Barth on Dogmatics--Commentary 4

“Where the gospel is proclaimed, there too of necessity the fact will be proclaimed along with it that there are men who have heard and accepted the gospel.”

“But the fact that we believe can only be a secondary matter, becoming small and unimportant in face of the outstanding and real thing involved in the Christian proclamation—and what the Christian believes…”

“It is noteworthy that, apart from this first expression ‘I believe’, the Confession is silent upon the subjective fact of faith.”

“By the silence of the Confession on the subjective side, by its speaking only of the objective Creed, it also speaks at its best, deepest and completest about what happens to us men, about what we may be, do, and experience.”

The modern world, at least in the western part, emphasizes the subjective. What is “my” model of the world?

Richard Rorty, the philosopher, advises us that if we do not like the predictions that come from a certain model…well, just change the assumptions…until you get a model which produces predictions that you are more comfortable with.

Models or worldviews or stories or schema or anything we use to predict with are abstractions from the world. These “tools” are not the world, itself. Hence, as Barth has stated earlier, they are incomplete and, hence, fallible.

In this sense, all models fall short and we should constantly be on the look-out to modify our models when we do find that they fall short or develop new models as we discover new questions or new problems that must be answered. And, we modify our models or create new models by changing our assumptions.

But, this does not mean that we just willy-nilly change assumptions to meet our own liking.

Our models are not absolutely adequate. The theologian David Tracy argues that our models can only be “relatively adequate.” That is, models can only be supported based upon the fact that it is relatively better than other models.

What makes them better than other models? Tracy states that for a model to be relatively adequate it must be logically consistent for we do not want to get contradictory predictions from our models. And, the model must predict at least as well in a given situation as any other logically consistent model.

This second point is so important. The model must “work”…it must “work” at least as well as other models. It seems to me that Rorty does consider this as a way to judge whether or not a model is successful. All, he seems to consider about a model is its “subjective side”…do we feel comfortable with the predictions that the model makes.

Barth does not see things this way. We must, in choosing a model, be concerned about how successful the model has been. Barth is arguing that individuals need to pay attention to the “objective side” of a model…whether or not the model has been chosen by many people because of its ability to produce predictions that result in good choices, help in making good decisions, and help in solving more and more difficult problems. And, this objective side, the “objective Creed”, speaks “at its best, deepest and completest about what happens to us men, about what we may be, do, and experience.”

That is, the Creed, the Christian model or worldview, works!

The modern approach to this where the emphasis is placed upon the subjective is examined in the latest novel of Jonathan Franken, titled “Freedom”. He follows the breakup of a family that was a part of the “me” generation and pursued their own thoughts and desires. Relationships collapse in this kind of an environment. Only at the end is an effort to rebuild bridges, to re-establish connections, and to live within community. Relying just on subjective models and subjective decision making produces fragmentation.

Another stab at describing this is by John Updike in his novel “In the Beauty of the Lilies.” This story begins with a description of how a Presbyterian minister loses his faith. His Christian model of the world is questioned within the modern community and this questioning raises issues that the minister cannot really answer satisfactorily for himself. The next generation lives a “good” life based on the foundation of the Christian model, but without the “Christian” faith and theology. This is not an uncommon phenomenon and John Stuart Mill speaks about how societies can live off the consequences of the models of an earlier generation without subscribing to the foundational assumptions of that model.

It is the third generation that becomes lost in Updike’s novel. This generation does not have the “why” and so the external values accepted by the second generation do not resonate. Without the “why” the model, the worldview, seems empty. So, this generation begins to search, to try other models, to find something that brings things together. They are looking for a “transcendence” that is absent in the second generation. And, without a foundation, this generation ends up tragically…at least in this work.

Barth emphasizes the objective side of the Creed. The “model”, the worldview, is not mine alone, it is also the “model” of many others.

The emphasis is upon the “in”. I believe “in”… The Creed explains this “in”, this object of faith, by which our subjective faith lives.

If one attempts to preserve just the subjective element of faith, that person will lose it. That is, they shall lose the “human form of existence.” They become a part of “what is” and hence get wrapped up in the “how” when they are really seeking the “why.” Without the “why” all, eventually, becomes empty as in the Updike story.

Still, a word of caution. One totally submit oneself to the “objective.” Emerson’s concern still applies in that the individual must achieve a certain “self-reliance” and not completely lose themselves in the thoughts of others. Remember, all models, worldviews, stories, etc., are incomplete and fallible.

Thus, a balance must be achieved within each individual between the objective and the subjective. Where this balance is struck for each individual is, of course, dependent upon the individual themselves. The best advice on this point, I believe, comes from David Tracy. Tracy writes that a person should “start where they are” but be open. Start with the objective models, the objective Creed, but listen and respond, to build a worldview that not only works for you, but, as Stanley Hauerwas writes, works “with the grain of the universe.”