Karl Barth’s lectures on Ephesians from 1921–22 are published for the first time in English in this little volume. The lectures provide a window into Barth’s developing theology during the critical period of the early 1920s and right around the publication of the second edition of Der Römerbrief (1922).1 Barth’s interest in exegetical work in the New Testament emerged in the preceding decade in the context of his pastoral duties in the Swiss village of Safenwil. It was in Safenwil that Barth’s study of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans led to his well-known commentary, appearing in two very different published editions.2 There he also preached serially through several other New Testament texts—including Acts, the Epistles to the Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, and the Epistle to the Hebrews—and taught through various portions of the Bible in study groups and confirmation classes.3 Soon after his appointment to a professorship in Reformed theology at the University of Göttingen in 1921, he took on a lecture load that had him teaching exegesis through focused series on New Testament texts; offerings in theology and doctrine on topics such as Calvin, Zwingli, the theology of the Reformed confessions, and Schleiermacher;4 and beginning in 1924 a cycle in Christian dogmatics.5 In addition to Ephesians, Barth lectured during the Göttingen period on James, 1 Corinthians 15, 1 John, Philippians, Colossians, and the Sermon on the Mount.6 The Ephesians lectures came right at the beginning, composing—with a series on the Heidelberg Catechism—Barth’s first lecture load, which he delivered during the Wintersemester of 1921/22.7
Barth’s lectures are interesting not only for the glimpse they offer into this early and critical stage of his theological career but also for the keen expository insights he brings to the interpretation of Ephesians in the context of university course work. As the introductory essays suggest and the lectures themselves exhibit, Barth was ambivalent, perhaps even uneasy, about the utility and appropriateness of historical-critical methods for uncovering the substance of the New Testament texts. In regard to Ephesians, Barth was, to be sure, thoroughly familiar with the contemporaneous discussions of the critical questions concerning issues such as the authorship, situation, and date of the letter, and of the relationship of Ephesians to the other texts in the Pauline corpus. However, in Barth’s comments on the epistle, such historical and philological work is subordinated to the concern of hearing the apostolic testimony afresh. For Barth, the yield of good critical research into the biblical texts is the elucidation of the message of Scripture so that the significance of that message is received by hearers in the present. But exegesis can only support the communication of the message; it can never be said to establish it. God alone is the one who addresses us through the voice of Scripture. The extent to which Barth successfully negotiated the distinction between the speaking God and Scripture’s voice, between the two horizons of the text, and between the often competing methodological strategies of critical exegesis and theological interpretation is a matter of ongoing discussion among Barth scholars, researchers in modern theology, and those interested in the theological interpretation of Scripture. The publication of this English edition of the Ephesians lectures sheds new light upon Barth’s contribution to theology’s perennial labor of sorting out these issues.
Theological commitments evident throughout Barth’s writings from the Göttingen period animate his interpretation of the letter. In particular, we find Barth devoting considerable attention to how, for the Pauline author of Ephesians, the “eschatological character of divine presence and Christian existence”8 manifests itself in the revelation of the “mystery of [God’s] will” (Eph. 1:9)—a concern that is also at the heart of the second edition of Der Römerbrief, which Barth was preparing at the same time he delivered these lectures on Ephesians. In addition to providing an incisive analysis of the critical quality of Barth’s exegetical moves, Francis Watson’s introductory essay offers a comparison of the eschatology that emerges in these lectures to statements found elsewhere in texts from the period, specifically in the Romans commentary and in Barth’s lectures on 1 Corinthians 15. Watson’s remarks on the cross-currency between Barth and Rudolf Bultmann during the early 1920s are bound to inspire further investigation, as the relationship between Barth and Bultmann is critical for understanding the ascendancy of eschatological and apocalyptic themes in German theology between the wars.
John Webster takes up these themes as well, framing the eschatology of the Göttingen period beneath the broader heading of the relation between God and creatures. Webster shows, among other insights, that Barth’s posture vis-à-vis the text of Ephesians as a historical document reflects his thesis that the God who speaks and the creatures who hear remain distinct even while meeting in the event of revelation. The apostolic texts are caught up in the communicative act of God’s self-disclosure, and thus the exegete’s critical exchanges with the literary features of the New Testament documents are subordinate to the task—which is always beyond the exegete’s control—of hearing God speak through the texts. This account shores up the notion that Barth’s relative lack of interest in historical and philological questions is a thoroughgoingly theological decision about the ontology of Scripture and its location and function in the divine economy.
The first critical German edition of the Ephesians lectures appeared only recently in the Gesamtausgabe alongside a series of sermons and notes on the epistle from 1919–20 and a parallel presentation of two lecture cycles on James from 1922–23 and 1928–29, respectively.9 While a translation of the James lectures is long overdue (as are translations of the lecture cycles on 1 John, Colossians, and the Sermon on the Mount, all of which also have yet to appear in German in the Gesamtausgabe), the decision was made to proceed with publication of Ephesians independently of other lecture series from the period. We have not included in the present volume a translation of the material on Ephesians from Barth’s time in Safenwil, since many of the insights from his sermons and study notes reappear in the Göttingen lectures. In any case, the lectures exhibit a more fulsome engagement with Ephesians than what we find in the documents from the antecedent Safenwil period.
All of this being said, the reader is advised to consider the genre of the literary work at hand prior to advancing into the text. For these are, indeed, lectures on Ephesians, intended originally for aural consumption, designed for an audience of degree-seeking students who for the most part were training for public ministry, and prepared in the throes of a transitional period during which the young Barth struggled to orient himself to the demands of “university” theology. Moreover, Barth labored so intensely through the first chapter of the epistle that he was forced to rush through chapters two through six in the single lecture of February 23, 1922. However, although this volume hardly qualifies as a commentary on Ephesians, it is yet a significant contribution to the commentary tradition associated with the letter, as we encounter in these pages one of the great theological minds of the Christian church fully entranced by the ancient text and eager to broadcast its message to his hearers.
The unique circumstances surrounding this publication have required some editorial decisions in need of explanation in this introduction. This is not, as it were, a critical study edition of the Barth text. Rather, the abiding concern met in this publication is to introduce readers to the first English translation of a significant Barth manuscript. As such, the focus of this volume is on the English rendering of the Ephesians lectures. In an effort to keep the text of the translation as close in appearance to Barth’s original transcripts as possible, we have used endnotes for citations, cross-references, and annotations and have used footnotes sparingly to mark Barth’s own marginal notes and for critical comments on the handwritten manuscripts. The endnotes incorporate translations of materials from the critical notes of volume editor Jörg-Michael Bohnet in Erklärung des Epheserbriefes W.S. 1921/22 in the Gesamtausgabe as well as textual notes from the translator. As per the style suggestions of the Barth Translators’ Seminar, we have retained the German formatting for endnote citations. Barth introduced each unit of Ephesians with the Greek text followed by his own German translation and then referred back to the Greek in his expositions, often without retranslating words and phrases. The English translation mirrors the original text; that is, only the German is rendered in English here, while the Greek remains untranslated. Whenever possible, we have offered translations of other foreign languages, as when Barth quotes from Calvin in the original French. Biblical cross-references in parentheses are from Barth’s handwritten manuscript; those in brackets were inserted into the critical edition by the editor. While we have made efforts to provide a gender-neutral translation, there are instances where it was deemed necessary to translate Mensch as “man,” even when referring to a human individual generically. Likewise, the translation follows the German original in the gender of pronouns and in language for deity.
We have broken up the text of the lectures into four main portions corresponding to Barth’s own division of his pedagogical labors. He followed a standard commentary convention of conceiving chapter one of the letter as consisting of three units of material: the epistolary introduction (1:1–2), a single complex Greek sentence extending through twelve verse divisions that Barth refers to as the great “doxology” (1:3–14), and the elaboration of the author’s prayers for the letter’s original recipients (1:15–23). Within each of these units, we have demarcated the individual lectures by including the dates of delivery.
We are pleased to include remarks on the translation by Ross M. Wright, who frames the production of the English text within the context of his own work on Barth’s early theology, provides further commentary on the origins of the lectures, and offers clarification of technical details concerning his English rendition.
Kaitlyn Dugan, curator of the Barth Collection at Princeton Theological Seminary, offered her expertise at several key junctures during the life of this project and helped the Baker Academic team secure permissions for the striking cover image of Barth from 1925. Hans-Anton Drewes, formerly of the Karl Barth-Archiv in Basel, offered enthusiastic support of the project during the earliest phases. His successor Peter Zocher mediated some early correspondence with the publisher of the German edition, Theologischer Verlag Zürich (TVZ), granted permission for Wright to reuse for the translator’s preface material that had previously appeared in an edition of the Archiv’s newsletter, and supplied the photographs of Barth’s handwritten manuscripts. Niklaus Peter, a member of the Karl-Barth Stiftung, read the translation at the request of TVZ and offered a handful of suggestions for improvment. It was a pleasure to work with Lisa Briner and her team at TVZ to sort out the contract and other legal arrangements. Wright and Francis Watson read through this introductory piece and offered helpful comments. David Chao of the Barth Translators’ Seminar provided a summary of the Seminar’s style protocols. The contents of the volume were greatly enhanced by David Cramer and Melisa Blok, who joined the editorial team at Baker Academic just before this project entered the production queue.
Barth’s Epistle to the Ephesians turned out to be my final opportunity to work with my erstwhile Doktorvater, John Webster, who passed away unexpectedly on Wednesday, May 25, 2016. His introductory essay, which he delivered to me on the last day of March 2016, is one of his final original pieces. From what I have been able to gather, it also is his last word on Barth, with whose thought he had wrestled his entire career. I had seen John in St Andrews just weeks prior to his death, and on that occasion he shared some constructive comments on the translation of the lectures and on these prefatory remarks. John was actively involved in this project from the very beginning, lending his imprimatur to the publication during the acquisitions phase, eagerly agreeing to pen the essay in spite of his hectic writing schedule, and liberally offering encouragement, advice, and feedback as the manuscript materialized. This project would not have been possible without John’s constant support, generosity, and good humor.