Neo-Orthodoxy

Neo-Orthodoxy is a theological movement that emerged in the early 20th century as a reaction to liberal Protestantism and its optimistic view of human nature, as well as a response to the crises brought about by World War I and World War II. The most prominent figures in this movement were Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, and Reinhold Niebuhr. While Neo-Orthodoxy sought to return to some of the central tenets of classical Christian theology, especially the emphasis on the transcendence of God and the reality of human sin, it departed from historic Christian orthodoxy in several key areas, particularly in its views on Scripture and revelation.

Neo-Orthodoxy is considered heterodox (a deviation from orthodoxy) in certain theological circles, particularly in its rejection of the inerrancy of Scripture and its existential approach to revelation. While it attempted to reclaim aspects of Reformation theology, it did so in ways that, from the perspective of orthodox Christianity, compromised the authority of the Bible.

History of Neo-Orthodoxy

1. Origins and Background: Neo-Orthodoxy arose in Europe, particularly in Germany and Switzerland, during the early 20th century. It was a response to the theological liberalism that dominated much of Protestant theology in the 19th century. Liberal theology, influenced by Enlightenment rationalism and historical-critical methods, often downplayed traditional doctrines such as the divinity of Christ, the reality of sin, and the supernatural elements of the Bible (such as miracles and the resurrection).

   World War I and the subsequent disillusionment with human progress shattered the liberal Protestant vision of inevitable human improvement. The devastation of the war and the rise of totalitarian regimes in the 20th century revealed the depth of human sin, leading many theologians to reconsider the optimistic views of human nature that liberal theology had promoted.

2. Karl Barth and the Rise of Neo-Orthodoxy: The key figure in the Neo-Orthodox movement was Karl Barth (1886–1968), a Swiss Reformed theologian. Barth became disillusioned with the liberal theology of his time, which he had initially embraced. His seminal work, the Epistle to the Romans (1919), marked a sharp break from the liberal theological tradition. Barth emphasized the transcendence of God, the radical otherness of divine revelation, and the sinfulness of humanity, which he argued could not be overcome by human effort or reason.

   Barth’s theology became foundational for the Neo-Orthodox movement. His magnum opus, the multivolume Church Dogmatics, further developed his views on revelation, the person of Christ, and the doctrine of election. Barth's influence spread across Europe and North America, shaping the theological landscape of Protestantism in the mid-20th century.

3. Other Key Figures:

   • Emil Brunner (1889–1966), another significant figure in Neo-Orthodoxy, shared many of Barth’s concerns but differed on some theological issues, particularly the role of natural theology (Brunner believed that some knowledge of God could be gained through nature, while Barth strongly rejected this).
   • Reinhold Niebuhr (1892–1971), an American theologian, also contributed to the movement, particularly in the area of Christian ethics and his critique of both liberalism and fundamentalism. Niebuhr's theology focused on the complexity of human sin and the limitations of human justice in a fallen world.

4. Decline and Legacy: By the 1960s and 1970s, Neo-Orthodoxy began to lose its prominence, as new theological movements, such as liberation theology, process theology, and postmodern theology, emerged. However, its influence persists, particularly in its emphasis on the sovereignty of God and the fallenness of humanity, as well as its critique of both theological liberalism and conservative fundamentalism.

Theology of Neo-Orthodoxy

Neo-Orthodoxy sought to reclaim certain biblical themes while simultaneously incorporating aspects of existentialist philosophy and modern thought. Some of the key theological features of Neo-Orthodoxy include:

1. Revelation as Encounter: Neo-Orthodoxy rejects the idea of the Bible as the literal, inerrant Word of God, which is a key feature of historic Christian orthodoxy. Instead, Barth and other Neo-Orthodox theologians taught that revelation is not the Bible itself, but the event of God revealing Himself through Christ. The Bible is seen as a witness to the Word of God, but it is not the Word of God in and of itself. According to Barth, Scripture becomes the Word of God when God uses it to reveal Himself to the individual believer in a personal, existential encounter. This means that revelation is dynamic and situational, rather than propositional.

2. Transcendence of God: Neo-Orthodoxy emphasizes the utter transcendence of God, who is completely “other” and beyond human comprehension. Barth insisted that humans cannot know God through reason or natural theology but only through divine revelation in Christ. This is a corrective to the immanence stressed in liberal theology, where God is often seen as closely identified with the world and human progress. Barth's theology asserted that God is radically different from His creation, and any knowledge of God must come from God’s self-revelation, not from human attempts to discover God through nature or philosophy.

3. Sin and the Radical Fallenness of Humanity: Neo-Orthodoxy rejected the liberal Protestant view that humanity is inherently good and capable of moral progress. Instead, Barth and others emphasized the depth of human sin and the total depravity of humanity. They argued that humanity is alienated from God and incapable of saving itself through good works or rational thought. Sin, in the Neo-Orthodox view, is not merely a set of wrong actions but a fundamental condition of estrangement from God, which only God can overcome.

4. Christ-Centered Theology: For Neo-Orthodoxy, the person of Jesus Christ is central to all theology. Barth’s famous statement, “Jesus Christ is the electing God and the elected man,” reflects his belief that Christ is the center of God’s revelation and the point at which God’s will for humanity is made known. The doctrine of election is reframed in terms of Christ, rather than predestination in a Calvinistic sense. Barth's theology sought to root all of God's purposes and actions in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

5. Rejection of Natural Theology: Barth was adamant in his rejection of natural theology, which is the idea that human beings can know God through observation of nature, reason, or general revelation apart from Christ. Barth argued that only special revelation, which is God’s self-disclosure in Christ, can give true knowledge of God. This was a significant point of contention between Barth and Emil Brunner, who believed that there was some room for natural theology in Christian thought.

Why Neo-Orthodoxy is Considered Heterodox

While Neo-Orthodoxy was a corrective to many of the errors of theological liberalism, it itself deviates from historic Christian orthodoxy in several critical ways, particularly in its views on Scripture, revelation, and the nature of God’s Word. These deviations include:

1. Revelation and the Authority of Scripture: Neo-Orthodoxy’s view that revelation is an existential encounter with God, rather than the Bible as the inerrant Word of God, departs from the orthodox Christian teaching of Scriptural inerrancy and authority. Historically, orthodox Christianity has held that the Bible is God’s inspired, authoritative Word (2 Timothy 3:16), and that it is the objective and reliable revelation of God’s will and character. In contrast, Neo-Orthodoxy’s dynamic understanding of revelation—where Scripture becomes the Word of God only in specific, subjective encounters—undermines the Bible’s role as the objective and unchanging Word of God.

2. Subjectivity in Revelation: By emphasizing the subjective experience of revelation (i.e., the Bible "becoming" the Word of God in individual encounters), Neo-Orthodoxy opens the door to theological relativism. This contrasts with the historic Christian understanding that God's Word is fixed and universal, not dependent on individual experiences or interpretations. While the Holy Spirit illuminates Scripture, the orthodox view affirms that the truth of God’s Word is not contingent on subjective encounters but is objectively revealed in Scripture.

3. Rejection of Natural Theology: While historic Christian orthodoxy recognizes general revelation (God revealing Himself through creation, as in Romans 1:19-20), Neo-Orthodoxy denies that humans can know anything about God apart from special revelation in Christ. While Neo-Orthodox theologians rightly emphasize the necessity of Christ for salvation, their total rejection of general revelation conflicts with traditional Christian teachings about God's ability to make Himself known through the created order.

4. Christology and Election: Barth’s reframing of the doctrine of election in terms of Christ alone—where Jesus is both the electing God and the elected man—introduces theological ambiguity about the nature of predestination and election. Traditional Reformed theology distinguishes between God’s sovereign election of certain individuals for salvation and the universal call to faith in Christ. Barth’s theology collapses these distinctions, leading to questions about how election works in practice and undermining traditional Calvinist views on individual election.

Historic Christian Orthodox View

The historic Christian orthodox view contrasts with Neo-Orthodoxy in several ways:

1. Scripture as the Inerrant Word of God: Orthodox Christianity teaches that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, and infallible Word of God (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21). It is not merely a witness to revelation but is itself God’s revelation, providing an objective and unchanging foundation for faith and practice. The Bible is the ultimate authority for Christians, and it is through the Bible that God speaks to His people.

2. The Objectivity of Revelation: Christian orthodoxy affirms that God’s revelation in Scripture is objective, meaning that it communicates God's truth regardless of an individual's subjective experience. While personal encounters with God through the Holy Spirit are important, they are always grounded in and measured by the clear and authoritative teaching of Scripture.

3. General and Special Revelation: Historic Christian theology maintains a balance between general revelation (God's self-revelation through nature and creation) and special revelation (God’s specific self-disclosure through Christ and Scripture). Romans 1:19-20 teaches that people can know certain things about God through creation, but salvation and deeper knowledge of God are revealed through Christ and Scripture.

4. Christ-Centered Salvation: Orthodox Christianity teaches that salvation is found in Christ alone, but it also maintains a more traditional understanding of predestination and election, particularly in Reformed circles. Salvation is by grace through faith in Christ, and God sovereignly elects individuals to salvation (Ephesians 1:4-5). This view emphasizes the need for personal faith in Christ and the ongoing work of sanctification in the life of the believer.

Conclusion

Neo-Orthodoxy was a theological movement that arose in reaction to the theological liberalism of the 19th century and attempted to reclaim certain central aspects of Christian theology, such as the sovereignty of God and the depth of human sin. However, its views on revelation, the authority of Scripture, and the nature of election significantly depart from historic Christian orthodoxy. While Neo-Orthodoxy challenged the excesses of liberal theology, it introduced new theological problems, particularly with its existential approach to revelation and its rejection of the inerrancy of Scripture. The historic Christian orthodox view remains grounded in the belief that the Bible is the inspired, authoritative, and inerrant Word of God, through which God reveals His truth for all people.