Neo-orthodoxy
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
Part of a series on |
Dialectical theology |
---|
Christianity portal |
Part of a series on |
Protestantism |
---|
Christianity portal |
In
Revelation
Neo-orthodoxy strongly emphasises the revelation of God by God as the source of Christian doctrine.[4] This is in contrast to natural theology, whose proponents include Thomas Aquinas, who states that knowledge of God can be gained through a combination of observation of nature and human reason; the issue remains a controversial topic within some circles of Christianity to this day.[5]
Barth totally rejects natural theology. As Thomas Torrance wrote:
So far as theological content is concerned, Barth's argument runs like this. If the God whom we have actually come to know through Jesus Christ really is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in his own eternal and undivided Being, then what are we to make of an independent natural theology that terminates, not upon the Being of the Triune God—i.e., upon God as he really is in himself—but upon some Being of God in general? Natural theology by its very operation abstracts the existence of God from his act, so that if it does not begin with deism, it imposes deism upon theology.[6]
— Thomas Torrance, The Ground and Grammar of Theology, p. 89
Emil Brunner, on the other hand, believed that natural theology still had an important, although not decisive, role. This led to a sharp disagreement between the two men, the first of several controversies that prevented the movement from acquiring a unified, homogeneous character.
Transcendence of God
Most neo-orthodox thinkers stressed the
Existentialism
Some of the neo-orthodox theologians made use of existentialism. Rudolf Bultmann (who was associated with Barth and Brunner in the 1920s in particular) was strongly influenced by his former colleague at Marburg, the German existentialist philosopher Martin Heidegger.
Sin and human nature
In neo-orthodoxy,
Relation to other theologies
Neo-orthodoxy is distinct from both
The breadth of the term neo-orthodox, though, has led to its abandonment as a useful classification, especially after new emphases in mainline Protestant theology appeared during the 1960s. These included the "
Influence upon American Protestantism
From its inception, this school of thought has largely been unacceptable to Protestant fundamentalism, as neo-orthodoxy generally accepts biblical criticism; has remained mostly silent on the perceived conflicts caused by evolutionary science; and, in espousing these two viewpoints, it retains at least some aspects of 19th-century liberal theology.[8]
Critical assessment
Neo-orthodoxy was originally met with criticism by fellow Protestant theologians in Germany: Ferdinand Kattenbusch accused Barth of being a reactionary theologian, who wanted to overthrow the fruits that
According to
Important figures of the movement
- Karl Barth[1]
- Eduard Thurneysen
- Emil Brunner[1]
- Rudolf Bultmann
- Friedrich Gogarten
- Reginald H. Fuller[13]
- Dietrich Bonhoeffer
See also
- Christian existentialism
- Christian realism
- Dialectic § Criticisms
- New Covenant theology
- Orders of creation
- Paleo-orthodoxy
- Postliberal theology
- Radical orthodoxy
- Tidehverv
References
- ^ a b c "Neoorthodoxy". Encyclopædia Britannica (online ed.). Retrieved 2008-07-26.
- ^ Merriam; Webster. "Neoorthodoxy". Dictionary (online ed.). Retrieved 2008-07-26.
- ISBN 978-0-300-16264-6.
- ^ Meister and Stump. (2010). "Christian Thought: A Historical Introduction". Routledge, p. 449.
- ^ McGrath. (2013). "Christian History: An Introduction". Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 290–292.
- ISBN 0-567-04331-2.
- ^ "Neo-orthodoxy". Atheism. About. Archived from the original on 2011-01-06. Retrieved 2008-07-31.
- ^ Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 22, 2002, pp. 691–692.
- ISBN 978-3-11-165015-9.
- ISBN 978-0-226-15999-7.
- ISBN 978-3-7867-0343-3.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-19-826956-4.
- ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2023-05-29.
Further reading
- Bromiley, Geoffrey W (2000), An Introduction to the Theology of Karl Barth, Continuum International, ISBN 0-567-29054-9.
- Busch, E (1976). Karl Barth: His Life from Letters and Autobiographical Texts. Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans. ISBN 0-8028-0708-9
- Chung, Paul S, Karl Barth: God's Word in Action. James Clarke & Co, Cambridge (2008), ISBN 978-0-227-17266-7
- Ford, D (2005). The Modern Theologians, 3rd ed. Blackwell ISBN 1-4051-0277-2
- Goering, Timothy. "System der Käseplatte. Aufstieg und Fall der Dialektischen Theologie", in: Journal for the History of Modern Theology / Zeitschrift für Neuere Theologiegeschichte, 24.1 (2017), S. 1–50 (doi:10.1515/znth-2017-0001)
- Goering, Timothy: Friedrich Gogarten (1887–1967). Religionsrebell im Jahrhundert der Weltkriege (Studien zur Ideengeschichte der Neuzeit, Bd. 51), Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter 2017, ISBN 978-3-11-051730-9.
- Hall, DJ (1998) Remembered Voices: Reclaiming the Legacy of "Neo-Orthodoxy". Louisville, Westminster John Knox. ISBN 0-664-25772-0
- ISBN 1-58743-016-9
- Hordern, William. (1959). The Case for a New Reformation Theology. Philadelphia, Westminster Press.
- McCormack, B (1995), Karl Barth's Critically Realistic Dialectical Theology, New York: ISBN 0-19-826337-6.
- Sloan, Douglas (1994). Faith and Knowledge. Westminster John Knox Press. ISBN 0-664-22866-6
- Tillich, P (1951). Systematic Theology. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
- Tracy, D (1988). Blessed Rage for Order: The New Pluralism in Theology. San Francisco, Harper & Row. ISBN 0-8164-2202-8