Die invloed van Karl Barth by die Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk 1928-1959: 'n kerkhistoriese verkenning

[摘要] English: Thisresearchconcentratesonthewayinwhichthe20th centurytheologianKarlBarthbecameknownintheDutchReformed Churchbetween1928and1959.Primarysources, especially theological journals were scrutinized.In terms of these sourcesfourperiodsinthisregardwereidentified:1928-1932,1933-1945,1946-1952 and 1953-1959.IntheDutchReformedChurchtheyears1928-1934weredominatedecclesiologicallyandtheologicallybytheDuPlessiscase.Inthiscasematterssuch as views on Scripture, the revelation of God and Christology were not only the centre of attraction, but also questioned.During this time references were made to Karl Barth in a differentiated way:1.Professor Keet and dr. Du Preez introduced Barth by means of his own publications on Scripture and the church as creation of Christ.They wanted Barth's voice to be heard, in order to give direction in a theological dilemma.2.Dr. Snyman, editor of Die Ou Paaie and leading figure in the controversy againstDuPlessis,usedBarthwithoutconsultationofanyprimarysources,thus trying to gain theological profit.3.Du Plessis, editor of HetZoeklichttook notice of Barth, but regarded him negatively.HesawnofutureforBarthandcreatedanimageofBarth.DuPlessis was lead by secondary sources. Thenextperiodcoveredtheyears1933to1945.TheDuPlessiscasewassomething ofthepastandBarthwasnolongerconnectedtoitinacontextualisedway.ReadersofDie Gereformeerde Vaandel and Die Kerkbodewere informed of his positive role in the so called German church struggle against the Nazi-regime of Hitler.The emphasis of Barth on the freedom of the church and his rejection of all forms of natural theology were appraised.Die Soeklig reproduced the entire text of theBarmerErkläringinAfrikaans.ThisappreciationofBarthwasmostlydonebyB.B. Keet.AfterBarthleftGermany,attentionwasgiventohistheologicalconvictionsonceagain.InthisregardtwotracksofcritisismamongstDutchReformedtheologians,both positive and negative, became clear again.The negative line of interpretation were carried by representatives of a Neo-Calvinistic theology, which was introduced intoSouth-Africaduringthethirties.ProfessorHeppofthe'VrijeUniversiteitofAmsterdamplayedamajorroleinshapingthethoughtsofyoungmenonBarth, which did not regard him as a Reformed theologian at all.On the other hand there was still appreciation for Barth.Keet for instance persisted that the theology of Barth has to be evaluated positively.ThethirdperiodinwhichtheDutchReformedChurchtooknoticeofBarth,was confined to the years 1946 to 1952.During this period Barth was still referred to in two different and particular ways.The Neo-calvinists were critical of Barth.Keet, Du PreezandVerhoef,representingtheotherview,hadamorepositiveattitudetowardsBarth.Atthetimetheologicalstudentsalsoengagedthemselvesinstudy onBarth.AvisitbyG.C.Berkouwer(1949),thesuccessorofHeppatthe'VrijeUniversiteit,alsoleadtoanewtheologicaloriëntation.TheBerkouwervisitencouraged accountable research on Barth in the Dutch Reformed Church. Just as Hepp was instrumental in stimulating a nagative view on Barth amongst the ranksoftheDutchReformedChurchsince1935,Berkouwergavemomentumtothemorecritical-positiveviewofBarth.Thisbecameevidentafter1953.Amonography appeared even on Barth during 1955 in Afrikaans by J.A. Heyns.The negative Hepp-line however continued.Toconclude:thestudyshowedthatBarth'stheologicalviewsonChristandSchripturewereintroducedintheDutchReformedChurchinthecontextofthetheologicalcontroversyraisedbytheDuPlessiscasebetween1928and1932.Thereafter(1933-1936)theattentionoftheDutchReformedchurchwasalsofocusedonBarth'sroleintheGermanecclesiasticalresistancetoHitler.WithBarth in Switserland, young Dutch Reformed theologians, under influence of Dutch andNeo-Calvinisticviews,evaluatedBarth'snotionoftherevelationaswellasScripture critically.After the Second World War (1946-1952) the theology of Barth in a more comprehensive way drew attention:appreciative and declinatory.This was continued during the 1950's in terms of more incisive study.

[发布机构] University of the Free State