Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Theoretical framework.
It is difficult, if not impossible, to formulate an understanding of mission without an historical perspective. It would be irresponsible to do so, because the Church belongs to history and therefore has assumed certain definitions regarding its identity and role.
I have decided to focus on the ecclesiology of Karl Barth. I have chosen Barth, because it is my opinion that the ecclesiology Barth offers is one of the most relevant concerning the questions that are asked of the church today. During Barth’s lifetime we find a dynamic understanding and implementation of different definitions of mission. The rise of the Reich in the early 20th century, using its support of a significant section of German churches, tabled its agenda not merely as a political one, but as an agenda devoted to its obedience to God’s will. Needless to say, all Christians did not accept this definition of mission and Church identity. So, German Christians found themselves divided in their faith, and practice of this faith in a world which was slowly breaking apart.
In search of unity, we find a monumental attempt to define the Church’s role in society in the Barmen Declaration. This declaration was indeed the turning point in Church history as it was a consensus document between different denominations and paved the way for the Church’s response to the historical-political era it was about to face (Busch 1976:236). Karl Barth undoubtedly played a major role in the formulation of the Barmen Declaration (Busch 1976:236)3. It was his opinion that the Church’s sole responsibility was to be engaged in mission (Mebust 1981:15-17) and had a responsibility to find the true meaning of this concept.
The Barmen Declaration cannot be seen as a complete description or summary of Barth’s theological mind, but it does give us an indication of a true and authentic struggle to make sense of the identity and role of the church. Barth wrote many papers and books, referring directly or partially to the mission that God has called the Church to, so this may show that this question was important in the formulation of his theological understanding. It is refreshing to see that Barth’s theology was not born out of solely academic research, but that Barth’s theology developed primarily as a response to real theological questions posed by both the Church and the world. The twenty-first century holds many parallels with Barth’s world. Superpowers in the world today, such as the United States of America, rely on the support of conservative, fundamentalist Christian understandings in order to push their agenda.
Once again, the Church finds itself divided and does not portray unity in the 3 Krötke (2006:271) affirms this point. The Barmen Declaration, in his (Krötke 2006:271) opinion, also displays classic traits of Barth’s theology. The way in which the Word is emphasised as the decisive form of God’s self-disclosure, therefore downplaying the notion of Natural Theology, is a good example. understanding of its identity and/or role on issues, such as the war in Iraq, stem-cell research or abortion on demand. The list goes on.
In this thesis, it is my quest to identify Mission-themes in Barth’s ecclesiriology, to describe the relevance in modern theological discussions and then to formulate an understanding of mission that would describe the church’s identity and role in the times in which we live.
CHAPTER KARL BARTH AND THE CHURCH: A THEOLOGICAL PROBLEM.
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. Who was Karl Barth? 16
3. WHAT IS THE CHURCH?.
3.1 « The Church is at all events a people… » (Barth 1939:5)
3.2 “Furthermore, the Church is a continuation of Israel…” (Barth 1939:6)
3.3 “…finding comfort in the history of Jesus as her Lord.” (Barth 1939:7)
3.4 “…and hoping for the consummation of the Kingdom of God.” (Barth 1939:7)
3.5 “In order to achieve this, the Church is called to service” (Barth 1939:8).
3.6 “…through the Power of the Spirit” (Barth 1939:9).
4. BARTH’S PROBLEM WITH THE CHURCH.
CONCLUSION.
CHAPTER 2. THE CHURCH AND GOD.
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. THE GATHERING OF THE COMMUNITY.
2.1 It is God who speaks.
2.2 How does God speak?
2.3 What does God speak about?
3. UPBUILDING THE COMMUNITY.
3.1 Identity
4. SENDING THE COMMUNITY. 8
CHAPTER 3 ECUMENICAL MISSION: THE CHURCH’S MISSION TO ITSELF
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. IS THERE A PLACE FOR DENOMINATIONS IN BARTH’S ECCLESIOLOGY?
3. ENGAGING WITH DIFFERENT CONFESSIONAL MOVEMENTS.
3.1 Catholicism and Protestantism
3.2 Analogia
3.2.1 How is Barth’s reaction received?
4. HOW DOES BARTH SEE THE ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT?
4.1 Political ecumenism.
4.2 Inter-confessional dialogue.
CONCLUSION.
CHAPTER 4 THE CHURCH AND RELIGION.
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CHRISTIANITY AND JUDAISM IN THE THEOLOGIES OF HANS KÜNG AND JÜRGEN MOLTMANN
2.1 Hans
2.2 Jürgen Moltmann. 2
3. THE CHURCH AND TRUTH.
3.1 What is religion?
4. THE CHURCH AND REVELATION.
4.1 Truth and Revelation.
4.2 Revelation and salvation.
5. THE EXPRESSION OF TRUTH.
6. THE CHURCH AND ISRAEL: CHRISTIANITY AND JUDAISM.
7. JESUS CHRIST AND CHRISTIANITY.
CHAPTER 5 THE CHURCH’S MISSION TO THE “FAITHLESS”
CHAPTER 6 BARTH’S DEFINITION OF CHURCH IN POLITICS AND CULTURE
CHAPTER 7. THE END OF THE CHURCH OR THE CHURCH’S END?.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
