| Part of a series on |
| Christianity |
|---|
 |
- Neo-Orthodoxy can also refer to a form of Orthodox Judaism following the philosophy of " Torah im Derech Eretz", and the ideas of late 20th century Eastern Orthodox theology, e.g. by Christos Giannaras
Neo-orthodoxy is an approach to theology that was developed in the aftermath of the First World War (1914-1918). It is primarily associated with the Swiss Protestant Karl Barth (1886-1968). The other significant theologians in this movement were Emil Brunner (1899-1966) and Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1966). Some theologians believe that Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971) did more to introduce Barthian neo-orthodoxy to America than anyone else.
The neo-orthodox thinkers had strong disagreements between themselves and so neo-orthodoxy cannot be considered to be a unified system. Nevertheless, this type of theology has a number of distinctive traits:
Firstly, there is a strong emphasis on the revelation of God by God as the source of Christian doctrine. Natural theology states that knowledge of God can be gained through a combination of observation of nature and human reason. Barth totally rejected natural theology. Brunner believed that natural theology still had an important role and this led to a sharp disagreement between the two men.
Secondly, there is a stress on the transcendence of God. Barth believed that the emphasis on the immanence of God had led human beings to imagine God to be ourselves writ large. He stressed the infinite qualitative distinction between the human and the divine. Bultmann coined the description of God as being "Wholly Other."
Thirdly, the neo-orthodox theologians made use of existentialism and in particular Christian existentialism. Bultmann was strongly influenced by the philosophy of his colleague Martin Heidegger. Barth was strongly influenced by the writings of the 19th century Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard. Kiekegaard was a critic of the liberal christian modernist effort to rationalise Christianity. Instead he maintained that Christianity is absurd and presents the individual with paradoxical choices. The decision to become a Christian is not a rational decision but a leap of faith. This was the foundation of Barth's theology of crisis.
Fourthly, there was a stress on the sinful nature of humanity. The neo-orthodox believed that the First World War had discredited any notion of inevitable progress; i.e. the idea that good people and good societies would ultimately evolve. Although pessimistic about human nature, many in the movement were involved in political activism. Barth was expelled from Germany by Hitler because of his anti- Nazi stance.
Fifthly, neo-orthodoxy is distinct from both liberal Protestantism and fundamentalism. This can be seen in Barth's understanding of the Bible. He rejected the fundamentalist claim that the Christian scriptures are inerrant. He rejected the modernist liberal Christian claim of that time, that God could be known through human scholarship. He believed that the Bible was the key place where the Word of God can be revealed to human beings, and that an existential leap of faith is required by the individual to hear what God has to say.
Historical Setting and Development
Theology
Important Thinkers
Neo-orthodoxy, Liberal Protestantism, and Fundamentalism
See also
| Part of a series on |
| Christianity |
|---|
|
|
- Neo-Orthodoxy can also refer to a form of Orthodox Judaism following the philosophy of " Torah im Derech Eretz", and the ideas of late 20th century Eastern Orthodox theology, e.g. by Christos Giannaras
Neo-orthodoxy is an approach to theology that was developed in the aftermath of the First World War (1914-1918). It is primarily associated with the Swiss Protestant Karl Barth (1886-1968). The other significant theologians in this movement were Emil Brunner (1899-1966) and Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1966). Some theologians believe that Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971) did more to introduce Barthian neo-orthodoxy to America than anyone else.
The neo-orthodox thinkers had strong disagreements between themselves and so neo-orthodoxy cannot be considered to be a unified system. Nevertheless, this type of theology has a number of distinctive traits:
Firstly, there is a strong emphasis on the revelation of God by God as the source of Christian doctrine. Natural theology states that knowledge of God can be gained through a combination of observation of nature and human reason. Barth totally rejected natural theology. Brunner believed that natural theology still had an important role and this led to a sharp disagreement between the two men.
Secondly, there is a stress on the transcendence of God. Barth believed that the emphasis on the immanence of God had led human beings to imagine God to be ourselves writ large. He stressed the infinite qualitative distinction between the human and the divine. Bultmann coined the description of God as being "Wholly Other."
Thirdly, the neo-orthodox theologians made use of existentialism and in particular Christian existentialism. Bultmann was strongly influenced by the philosophy of his colleague Martin Heidegger. Barth was strongly influenced by the writings of the 19th century Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard. Kiekegaard was a critic of the liberal christian modernist effort to rationalise Christianity. Instead he maintained that Christianity is absurd and presents the individual with paradoxical choices. The decision to become a Christian is not a rational decision but a leap of faith. This was the foundation of Barth's theology of crisis.
Fourthly, there was a stress on the sinful nature of humanity. The neo-orthodox believed that the First World War had discredited any notion of inevitable progress; i.e. the idea that good people and good societies would ultimately evolve. Although pessimistic about human nature, many in the movement were involved in political activism. Barth was expelled from Germany by Hitler because of his anti- Nazi stance.
Fifthly, neo-orthodoxy is distinct from both liberal Protestantism and fundamentalism. This can be seen in Barth's understanding of the Bible. He rejected the fundamentalist claim that the Christian scriptures are inerrant. He rejected the modernist liberal Christian claim of that time, that God could be known through human scholarship. He believed that the Bible was the key place where the Word of God can be revealed to human beings, and that an existential leap of faith is required by the individual to hear what God has to say.