Theology without Anathemas

The object of the present essay is to establish the possibility of “theology without anathemas.” First, an argument is given for the conclusion that infallible knowledge in matters of theology is not now possible. Both the Protestant doctrine of claritas scripturae and the Roman Catholic understanding of the Magisterium of the Church are rejected. Then, an alternative, “fallibilist” ecclesiology is proposed, according to which (knowingly) to belong to the Church is a matter of (understanding oneself as) having been claimed by Christ as His own. When combined with a universal doctrine of election and a highly objective and actualized doctrine of the Atonement, such a conception of the Church makes it possible to understand theology as a collaborative and cooperative effort on the part of all to understand better this Christ to whom they all always already belong.

“In That Water You Could Rinse Things Clean”

The aim of this article is to explore the depiction of baptism in Marilynne Robinson's Lila. In a way that is unique for contemporary fiction, the protagonist, Lila, seeks in baptism a relief of her chronic feelings of shame and a confirmation that she is loved. However, after her baptism the Calvinist doctrine of election drives Lila to emotional and theological despair. I suggest that the Calvinist notion of adoption in baptism is a unifying thread in Lila's theological and psychological dilemma, emphasized by her reading of the Book of Ezekiel. From a theological point of view, in baptism one changes ontologically for once and for all. But Lila's story shows that grappling with this transformation can be an emotionally painful process. Robinson depicts her protagonist as a theologian in her own right. This is significant in a novel in which the theological authority lies with male pastors and theologians, regardless of whether they are present in theological books or in religious communities in the 1950s Midwest. Lila understands in a mystical experience of heaven that she will be able to bring her non-Christian loved ones with her into heaven. This unusual rewriting of sacramental theology signifies how Lila constructs her own theology; a rewriting that connects baptism with Barth's universalism and his idea of restoring all humanity. Thus, I argue in this article that in Lila Robinson incorporates a recurring idea of sacramental theology into her fiction, a final restoration in which grace mends the relationships severed in and by life.

Election

This chapter introduces and summarizes Barth’s doctrine of election. It begins with an overview of Barth’s criticism and rejection of classical Augustinian and Reformed versions of predestination. It then treats Barth’s Christological revision of the tradition by focusing on his conception of Jesus Christ as both the subject and the object of election. It shows how Barth’s doctrine of election is connected to his doctrine of God, highlighting how Barth’s understanding of ‘God as the one who loves in freedom’ serves as the key to understanding his doctrine of election. Finally, it suggests a new approach to the current debate over Barth’s doctrine of election by seeing it as a version of the classical intellectualist–voluntarist debate.

Barth and Universal Salvation

Pan-chiu Lai takes up the question of universal salvation in Barth, in conversation particularly with Chinese Buddhism, which recognizes a variety of entrances or “dharma-gates” to salvation. After describing several aspects of the universalism of this Mahayana tradition, Lai turns to Barth and notes parallels in his own theology, including the provocative suggestion that what some scholars deem an inconsistency or change in Barth’s position over time may actually be an example of the Buddhist practice of “skillful means,” a change in teaching method in order to address a different concern. Finally, in considering Barth’s doctrine of election, Lai suggests that “Barth’s universalism is more fundamental to his own position, while his denial of universalism is merely his own skillful means which is made for the benefit of his audience.” Even so, from a Mahayana perspective Lai offers specific critiques of Barth’s “implicit universalism.”