Book Review Series: 'The God of Israel and Christian Theology' - Detailed Review: Chapter Four
Consummation at the End of Christendom
Barth and Rahner
In chapter four, R. Kendall Soulen explores the works of two significant twentieth-century theologians, Karl Barth and Karl Rahner. These two figures, despite their different theological backgrounds, both aimed to challenge and move beyond the simplified doctrines of early modern theology. They sought to revitalize theological thinking by drawing on their traditions and using imaginative approaches to explain the Christian faith.
Soulen highlights the similarities in how Barth and Rahner critiqued the traditional narrative models of theology. They both questioned the hidden assumptions in these models, which often led to a limited understanding of God's work. Despite their efforts, Soulen argues that both theologians ultimately failed to fully break free from the narrative constraints they criticized. This failure is attributed to their inability to overcome the idea of supersessionism, which suggests that Christianity has replaced Judaism.
Barth and Rahner's relationship with the ideas of Friedrich Schleiermacher, a pioneer of modern liberal theology, is also examined. They shared some of Schleiermacher's views, particularly his focus on the central role of Jesus Christ in God's plan for creation and redemption. However, they rejected Schleiermacher's tendency to reduce theology to simple doctrines and sought a deeper engagement with traditional dogma.
One of the key points Soulen discusses is Barth and Rahner's approach to the concept of consummation—God's ultimate purpose for creation. Both theologians agreed that this purpose is centered on Jesus Christ and involves a transformative encounter between God and humanity. However, they differed on how this encounter should be understood, with Barth emphasizing the importance of the covenant with the Jewish people and Rahner focusing on a more existential approach.
Soulen concludes that while Barth and Rahner made significant contributions to theology, their allegiance to a Christ-centered narrative and the resulting supersessionism limited their ability to provide a convincing alternative to traditional models. Their work remains valuable for the insights it offers, but it also demonstrates the challenges of developing a theology that fully honors the complexities of covenant history and the relationship between God and humanity.
Barth on Consummation
Soulen discusses Karl Barth's theology, focusing on the idea of consummation—God's ultimate plan for creation. Barth sees consummation as a covenantal relationship where God freely initiates, sustains, and completes His work with humanity. For Barth, God's covenant with creation is the supreme good and the reason for creation in the first place. God, as the Creator, grants existence and, as the Lord of covenant history, invites humans into a new relationship based on responsibility and encounter with God. This relationship gives humans a new identity beyond their natural being.
Barth's theology of creation and covenant is summarized in two key ideas: "Creation is the external basis of the covenant" and "Covenant is the internal basis of creation." These concepts highlight the mutual relationship between creation and covenant in God's plan. Barth believes that God's work as Consummator—His ultimate purpose—takes concrete shape through the covenant with the Jewish people. This covenant is not arbitrary but a key part of God's plan from the beginning of time.
Barth's innovative proposal challenges traditional Christian theology, which often views God's work through the stories of Genesis and the fall of Adam. Instead, Barth emphasizes the covenant with Israel as central to understanding God's work with humanity. This approach reinterprets the role of the Hebrew Scriptures and Israel in shaping theological conclusions.
Barth's decision to place Israel's covenant at the heart of God's consummating work redefines the nature of God's grace. It is no longer just about redemption from sin but about God's gracious election of Israel as a foundational aspect of His plan. This covenant is eternal and unbreakable, emphasizing mutual responsibility and a relationship based on freedom and love.
Barth also addresses the role of Gentiles (non-Jews) in God's plan, suggesting that their inclusion in covenant history depends on Israel's election. Gentiles find their place within the broader context of God's work with Israel. This inclusion shows that the covenant with Israel is a means for God's consummating work for all creation.
In essence, Soulen highlights how Barth rethinks traditional Christian theology by focusing on the covenant with Israel, viewing it as central to God's plan for creation. Barth's approach challenges supersessionism—the idea that Christianity replaces Judaism—by emphasizing the ongoing importance of the covenant with Israel. This perspective provides a fresh understanding of God's work and the role of both Jews and Gentiles in His plan.
Barth’s Christocentric Concentration
Soulen expands on Karl Barth's theology, particularly focusing on how Barth views God's covenant with Israel and its fulfillment through Jesus Christ. Barth sees the covenant with Israel as an important but temporary stage in God's larger plan, which ultimately centers on Jesus. Barth believes that God's ultimate covenant is with all of humanity through Jesus Christ, who unites God and humans. This view means that the covenant with Israel was a precursor to the broader, more inclusive covenant established through Christ.
Barth argues that Jesus Christ is central to understanding God's work in creation. He states that God's relationship with Israel points to a larger covenant that encompasses all people through Jesus. This idea reshapes traditional views by suggesting that the covenant with Israel finds its true fulfillment in Christ's life, death, and resurrection. Consequently, Israel's role, according to Barth, ends with the arrival of Jesus, who inaugurates a new phase where the church takes on the role of the new Israel.
For Barth, the covenant with creation is achieved in Jesus, making Jesus the key figure in God's plan. This belief highlights that God's covenant involves not just the Jewish people but all humanity through Christ. The covenant identity, therefore, is about being united with Jesus, rather than any specific ethnic or national identity.
Barth also discusses how the church, as the new Israel, signifies humanity's universal election in Christ. He emphasizes that the promises and responsibilities initially given to Israel are now fulfilled and extended to all through the church. This shift signifies a broader and more inclusive understanding of God's plan.
Barth stresses that Christ does not abolish the covenant with Israel but brings it to fulfillment. He uses theological arguments to show that the old and new covenants are part of the same divine plan, differing only in form, not substance. Barth views the old covenant as a natural and provisional arrangement that prepares the way for the ultimate fulfillment in Christ.
Barth asserts that the church now embodies the promise of the covenant, taking over from Israel as the community that witnesses God's work. This transition from Israel to the church marks the completion of Israel's mission, which culminates in the coming of Jesus. Barth's rigorous approach underscores that Israel's historical and carnal identity has run its course with the advent of Christ.
In his understanding of human nature, Barth believes that humanity's true value lies in its ability to be in a covenant relationship with God, a concept he calls "co-humanity." This includes the idea that humanity's social nature is essential for fulfilling God's purposes. However, Barth redefines the concept of creatureliness to focus on the relationship with Christ, not just biological or generational continuity.
Barth sees history as culminating in Christ's resurrection, which he considers the end of traditional human history and the beginning of a fulfilled time for the church. This perspective suggests that Christ's coming marks the end of Israel's unique historical role and transitions to a new phase where the church represents God's covenant.
Despite his innovative views, Barth does not entirely dismiss Israel's ongoing significance. He acknowledges the mystery of Israel's continued existence as a testament to God's faithfulness. Barth's theology maintains that God's covenant with Israel, while fulfilled in Christ, continues to be a sign of God's enduring promise and faithfulness.
Rahner on Consummation
R. Kendall Soulen's discusses the theology of Karl Rahner, particularly focusing on Rahner's concept of "supernatural existential," which is linked to his understanding of consummation. Unlike Karl Barth, who emphasizes the covenant with Jesus Christ, Rahner explores the unique aspects of God's grace and how it interacts with human identity.
Rahner believes that God's work as Consummator is shown through the way God bestows grace and interacts with humanity. He thinks that God's grace is not just about the end goal (consummation) but is deeply tied to human identity and experience. This idea leads Rahner to articulate what he calls "covenant history," emphasizing that human religious identity is shaped by God's grace and presence throughout history.
While Rahner shares some similarities with Barth's theology, such as the importance of God's grace, he diverges by focusing more on the individual's spiritual journey and how God's grace is perceived and internalized. Rahner's theology suggests that God's grace is received by humans not because they have an inherent capacity for it, but because it is a gift from God that transforms human nature.
Rahner argues that humans have a natural orientation toward God and that this orientation is a gift of grace. He believes that this orientation is part of what makes humans unique and capable of experiencing God's grace. This view challenges Barth's more structured approach by suggesting that grace is not something humans earn or possess by nature but something they receive and that fundamentally changes them.
To reconcile the apparent contradiction between human nature and the reception of God's grace, Rahner proposes that humanity's ability to receive grace is not part of their natural state but is given by God. This means that humans are oriented toward God by grace, not by their natural capabilities.
Rahner also draws on philosophical concepts from thinkers like Thomas Aquinas and Martin Heidegger. He uses Aquinas' idea of God's creative love and Heidegger's concept of existentiality to explain how God's grace operates in human lives. Rahner's "supernatural existential" is a permanent aspect of human existence that allows humans to be oriented toward God and His consummating work.
Rahner's theology offers a unique perspective on the relationship between God's grace and human identity. He emphasizes that grace is a gift that shapes human nature and religious identity, making it possible for humans to engage with God in a meaningful way. This approach provides a fresh understanding of how God's work as Consummator is experienced in individual lives and throughout human history.
The Shape of the Christian Story
Rahner's concept of the "supernatural existential" shapes his understanding of the Christian story. Rahner emphasizes that every episode in the Christian narrative involves God's grace, which deeply engages with humanity's historical identity. This perspective highlights that God's grace is a fundamental part of human existence, continually shaping our innermost identity.
Rahner builds on the ideas of Friedrich Schleiermacher but adds his own insights, particularly emphasizing the dynamic relationship between humans and God. He believes that humans are naturally oriented toward God, but this orientation is a gift of grace rather than something intrinsic to human nature. This idea helps Rahner maintain that humans are always more than mere rational beings because of God's grace.
While Rahner aligns with Schleiermacher in some areas, he also brings unique contributions. He agrees that the Christian story involves a universal capacity for consummation—humans' ultimate union with God—but he insists that this is due to grace. Rahner argues that even though humans lost sanctifying grace with the Fall, they retained their fundamental orientation toward God.
Rahner emphasizes that Jesus Christ is central to God's plan for humanity. Jesus embodies God's offer of grace from both above (divine) and below (human). Through Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, God's intention for human creation is fully realized. Rahner does not view Jesus as merely completing a covenant but as ensuring the success of God's work for all creation.
Unlike Karl Barth, Rahner does not connect the Christian story to the Hebrew Scriptures and Israel's history in the same way. Rahner views the events from Abraham to Christ as preparatory steps leading to the main event of Christ's incarnation. He tends to see Israel's history as part of a broader framework that ultimately points to Jesus.
Rahner's theology, while rich and complex, often remains formal and focuses on the overarching themes of creation, fall, redemption, and consummation. He believes that our capacity for union with God is a gift of grace, not something inherent to human nature. This insight, while profound, tends to be formal and leaves much of the traditional Christian story intact.
Soulen's review of Rahner's theology reveals a deep engagement with the nature of grace and human identity. Rahner's emphasis on the supernatural existential highlights how God's grace fundamentally shapes human existence and the Christian narrative. His theology offers a fresh perspective on how humans relate to God, stressing that our ultimate union with God is a gracious gift rather than a natural capacity.
Soulen discusses Karl Rahner's theology and how it compares to Karl Barth's ideas, particularly focusing on their interpretations of Christian history and covenant. Rahner's theology, like Barth's, attempts to creatively interpret Christian doctrine by building on the ideas of Friedrich Schleiermacher. Both theologians emphasize the importance of Jesus Christ in God's plan for humanity, but they approach the concept of covenant history differently.
Rahner's view, influenced by Schleiermacher, focuses on grace rather than nature. He believes that the Christian story shows how God's grace interacts with human identity throughout history. However, Rahner's approach tends to overlook the specific historical dimension of the covenant with Israel, which Barth tries to preserve. Rahner argues that human orientation towards God is a gift of grace, not a natural capacity, and this grace is central to understanding the Christian story.
While Rahner’s theology emphasizes the supernatural existential—a concept that suggests humans are oriented toward God's grace—this approach can sometimes seem abstract. It downplays the historical aspects of the biblical narrative, particularly the significance of Israel's role in the covenant. This tendency can make Rahner’s theology appear to lack a concrete historical foundation.
Barth, on the other hand, emphasizes the importance of Israel in understanding God's plan. He argues that God's covenant with Israel is crucial and shapes the entire narrative of Christian theology. Barth believes that by recognizing Israel's role, we can better understand the continuity and fulfillment of God's promises through Jesus Christ.
Despite their differences, both Rahner and Barth struggle with fully integrating the historical aspect of the covenant into their theological frameworks. They tend to absorb the covenant history into their broader theological concepts, sometimes at the expense of the specific historical context.
The book suggests that both theologians could have potentially avoided this issue by exploring how God's work continues in an ongoing history involving the Lord, Israel, and the nations. This approach would have maintained a strong connection to the biblical narrative while acknowledging the dynamic and contingent nature of human existence. However, Barth and Rahner did not pursue this path, likely because it would have required a significant departure from traditional theological structures.
In summary, Soulen's review highlights the strengths and limitations of Rahner's and Barth's theologies. While they offer profound insights into the nature of grace and the role of Jesus Christ, their interpretations sometimes struggle to maintain the historical and particular aspects of the biblical covenant. This critique encourages readers to consider how the Christian story can be understood in a way that honors both the universal and historical dimensions of God's work.