Karl Barth & the Pietists
Eberhard Busch, translator Daniel Bloesch
Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity, 2004
325 pages, paper, $27.00

Eberhard Busch, the renowned biographer of Karl Barth, introduces us to a pervasive theme in Barth's theology: his fluctuating relationship with the post-Reformation renewal movement known as Pietism. In the first edition of his Epistle to the Romans (1919), Barth shares his misgivings about Pietism, but in the second edition (1922) and in subsequent works he combines a negative critique with a positive appreciation for the enduring contribution of Pietism to the faith of the church. He sees this contribution as a recovery of the call to discipleship—the practice of the Christian faith. Yet Pietists were firm in their insistence that the Christian walk does not merit salvation; rather, it manifests a salvation already enacted in the life of the Christian.

According to the author, at the beginning of his theological pilgrimage, Barth was not enamored with Pietism. Indeed, he took open issue with this venture in renewal on the grounds of its individualism, subjectivism, and perfectionism. He also revealed a discomfort with the sectarian propensity in Pietism, which often leads to abandoning the sacramental forms of worship and liturgy. In addition, Barth accused Pietism of semi-Pelagianism, which places salvation partly in the hands of sinful mortals rather than solely in the hands of the holy and almighty God.

Yet even in his early years, Barth respected Pietism for its effort to remind the church that faith requires obedience, even though we cannot merit the reward for obedience by our own actions, however praiseworthy. Among the luminaries of Pietism to whom Barth gave favorable mention are Philip Spener, J. A. Bengel, Gerhard Tersteegen, Nikolaus Zinzendorf, Johann Christoph Blumhardt, Christoph Blumhardt, and A. G. Tholuck. Pietists or crypto-Pietists in his own time with whom he debated include Adolf Koeberle, Karl Heim, G. F. Nagel, and Adolf Schlatter.

Whereas the emphasis in Pietism was on the inner life—the life of devotion to the living Savior, Barth's emphasis was on the grace that spurs individuals to action, the grace that is based on the events of sacred history that are prior to the Christian's faith and obedience. The Pietists accused Barth of downplaying Christ in us in order to magnify Christ for us. Yet Busch makes clear that Barth was fully cognizant of the inward dimension of salvation and firmly believed that its objective side needs to be held in balance with its subjective side. This balance is not always evident, however, even when Barth allows for an experiential dimension in salvation.

Barth's Pietist opponents were particularly troubled by his seeming emphasis on the objective ground of salvation to the detriment of its subjective fruits. Sometimes Barth gave the impression that salvation is realized outside the sphere of human faith and endeavor. According to Busch, this line of interpretation fails to do justice to Barth's adamant conviction that the efficacy of salvation is blocked by human intransigence, and such stubbornness can be overcome only by an invasion of grace that gives rise to faith in the risen Redeemer.

Busch tries to build bridges between Barth and Pietism. As a result, he brings to light certain themes in Barth that have been overlooked or downplayed by many of Barth's critics. Busch reminds us that Barth perceived the ineradicable truth that Pietism has its basis not only in the Protestant Reformation but also in the Enlightenment. The appeal to the inner light of conscience was conspicuous among rationalists as well as Pietists. In some cases Pietism even merged into rationalism.

On occasion, Barth's dialectical approach prevented him from perceiving certain truths that tended to undermine his argument. For example, Barth followed the Reformed tradition in affirming the inability of the finite to receive or contain the infinite (finitum non capax infiniti). Yet Busch rightly notes that through the grace of God we can be made capable of responding to God's gracious offer of redemption, for grace not only forgives us but also enables us to walk the way of the cross. The Pietists were very much aware of this truth, and it was not altogether lost to Barth.

Proponents of Pietism often accused Barth of neglecting the role of experience in our salvation. For Barth, we are saved not by the experience of the new birth but by the new birth itself, which is often hidden from sight, feeling, and experience. It seems that in his theology, faith is only hope and not also possession, whereas for the Pietists, a felt experience of faith is necessary for a full appropriation of salvation. For Barth, faith is walking in the darkness toward the light. For the Pietist, faith is seeing the light in moments of joy and ecstasy. In my view, we need both emphases if we are to do justice to the whole counsel of God disclosed in Holy Scripture.

Busch reminds us that many of the Pietists threw their support to National Socialism, which made a place for mystical experience as an agency of salvation. But he also urges us to recognize that a significant number of Pietists strenuously objected to the Nazi ideology and, as a result, suffered dearly for their faith.

Toward the end of his life, Barth perceived the need for a theology of the Holy Spirit that would unite a theology of the cross and a theology of Pentecost. By drawing on the Pietist tradition, theologians can create this kind of theology. The Pietists can help us to discover that righteousness is not only a goal but also a possession—yet a possession that still is only partial and needs to be completed through a life of faith and obedience. For Barth, human beings under grace are in and of themselves "lost sinners." For the Pietists, such human beings are already changed persons and are summoned to bear witness to the fact that Christ creates new creatures through his unmerited grace. It is incumbent on us to bring together "the already" and "the not yet," which Barth also wished to do. A Pietism open to the searing judgment of Barthianism might hold promise for the church in the future.