Starting from the Theological Symposium ...
What was discussed at the first Theological Symposium of HKBTS?
Why does HKBTS promote the study of Karl Barth’s theology?
What is the relationship between Barth studies and the practical theology promoted by HKBTS?
Ever since the new academic building became fully operational in 2023, it has become the primary venue where the Hong Kong Baptist Theological Seminary (HKBTS) holds various academic activities, starting with academic exchanges, followed by mini-conferences. In March last year, we held the first Bible Conference, which was very fruitful, hence the second one on March 25 of this year. Additionally, on February 5 of this year, we held our first Theological Symposium, which was warmly received and achieved desirable results. The following is a report of the highlights of the day, allowing readers to understand why HKBTS promotes the study of Karl Barth’s theology and how Barth studies and the practical theology promoted by HKBTS are related.
Barth’s Theology in the Speculative Tradition
The first Theological Symposium of our seminary was held on February 5 in the grand conference hall on the third floor of the new academic building, with the theme “Barth’s Theology in the Speculative Tradition.” We invited two Chinese scholars specializing in Karl Barth’s theology, Dr. Alex Shaokai Tseng and Dr. Thomas Xutong Qu, to discuss the influence of Immanuel Kant’s thoughts on Barth’s theology and Jürgen Moltmann’s criticism of Barth’s doctrine of the Trinity respectively. The lectures were excellent and insightful.
The symposium was divided into two sessions, each lasting about an hour and a half, starting with the speakers’ presentation of their research results, followed by a response from one of our teachers, and finally, a time for public discussion. The symposium adopted a hybrid meeting format, with speakers, respondent speakers, and participants (including our faculty, students, alumni, as well as teachers and students from other theological seminaries and pastoral workers) attending either in person or via video conferencing. Approximately 140 participants joined the meeting with enthusiastic responses and a lively atmosphere.
Kant and Barth
The first session of the symposium was delivered by Dr. Alex Tseng (D.Phil., University of Oxford), Research Professor, School of Philosophy, Zhejiang University, on the topic “Reception of Kant in Modern Protestant Theology: As Illustrated in Karl Barth’s Speculative Theology,” and the respondent speaker was Dr. Curie Qu, Assistant Professor of Christian Thought at our seminary.
Dr. Tseng discussed how Kant’s thoughts influenced Barth’s speculative theology, allowing us to glimpse the profound reception of Kant in modern Protestant theology. Dr. Tseng refuted Bruce McCormack’s post-Kantian interpretation paradigm of Barth, pointing out that Barth adopted a phenomenalist (Phänomenalismus) interpretation of Kant, rather than the empirical realism (empirischer Realismus) advocated by McCormack, as it does not align with McCormack’s description of Barth’s “actualism” and McCormack had also ignored Barth’s own interpretation of Kant’s thoughts and his assessment of Kant in the history of Christian theology.
In the end, Dr. Tseng compared how Kant and Barth refuted René Descartes’s ontological argument and his phrase “I think, therefore I am” under the paradigm of Barth’s speculative theology, pointing out that there are in fact similarities in their arguments. Dr. Tseng further deduced that the way Kant refuted the phrase “I think, therefore I am” has indirectly yet profoundly influenced Barth through thinkers like Søren Kierkegaard. This reception history shows that Kant had influenced not only Barth but also Kierkegaard and several generations of Protestant thinkers with his philosophy being “in the air.”
Dr. Curie Qu fully agreed with Dr. Tseng’s interpretation of Kant and Barth, believing that his comprehensive sorting of the interpretative traditions of the two thinkers and his detailed analysis of their main concepts and propositions was both broad and nuanced. Dr. Qu added that Kant started to study the subject-object relation with humans as cognizing subjects, which are active; however, in the case of revelation-reception, it is God who takes the initiative in self-revelation, whereas humans as the cognizing subjects are actually passive. Moreover, both the reformed church and Barth believe that God is essentially unknowable and that humans are finite while God is infinite. If we attempt to understand the existence of God with intrinsic (a priori) categories, it would lead to errors like what Descartes describes in his phrase “I think, therefore I am.” According to Dr. Tseng’s explanation, both Barth and Kant considered this an attempt to make “analytic” truth masquerading as “synthetic” truth, or misuse of a priori categories, because “existence” is in the experiential domain, not applicable to the transcendental God.
Moltmann and Barth
The second session of the symposium was delivered by Dr. Thomas Qu (Ph.D., University of Heidelberg), Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, School of Humanities, Tsinghua University, on the topic “The Tension between Individuality and Communality: An Evaluation of Moltmann’s Criticism of Barth’s Doctrine of the Trinity,” and the respondent speaker was Dr. Sam Ip, Visiting Assistant Professor of Christian Thought at our seminary.
Dr. Thomas Qu cited the viewpoint of scholar Christoph Schwöbel, noting that Barth and Karl Rahner started from revelation theology to relay the foundations for the doctrine of the Trinity, providing decisive momentum for the “renaissance or revival of Trinitarian theology” at the end of the 20th century. Primarily based on Moltmann’s The Trinity and the Kingdom (1980), Dr. Thomas Qu listed a number of criticisms Moltmann made against Barth’s doctrine of the Trinity, including some serious accusations, with the key issue being Moltmann’s belief that Barth emphasized the precedence of God’s sovereignty over the Trinity, using the doctrine of the Trinity to secure and explain God’s subjectivity and lordship in His rule.
Dr. Thomas Qu discussed Barth’s doctrine of the Trinity based on Church Dogmatics I/1 §§8-12, pointing out that for Barth, the doctrine of the Trinity is “decisive and controlling” for the whole of dogmatics. Dr. Thomas Qu pointed out that for Barth, revelation is an event, essentially dynamic rather than static. The essential content of revelation is that “God reveals Himself as the Lord.” The doctrine of the Trinity is not explicitly stated in the Bible, but it is based on the Bible and is an appropriate interpretation of revelation and the self-revealing God in His revelation. When discussing the specific content of Barth’s doctrine of the Trinity, Dr. Thomas Qu pointed out the aspects we should pay attention to when studying Barth. He also responded to criticisms from scholars like Moltmann against Barth and clarified some of their misunderstandings of Barth’s thoughts.
Dr. Sam Ip commended Dr. Thomas Qu’s lecture for its detailed content and clear explanation, which also triggered his own thoughts on these two theological giants. Firstly, Barth and Moltmann used different methodologies, with Barth establishing the conception of revelation from the witness of Scripture, while Moltmann focused on the cross event, leading to distinct styles in their doctrines of the Trinity with different focal points and orientations. Secondly, when exploring his doctrine of the Trinity, Barth critiqued and integrated traditional theology in order to seek its renewal, development, and continuation; Moltmann, on the other hand, was committed to exploring the possibilities of theology at the forefront of culture and time. Observing the different orientations of the two theologians, one finds that continuing tradition can sometimes be a burden, but while adapting to the needs of the times, one needs to be cautious, and prevent contemporary ideologies from dominating or overriding our exploration of faith. Lastly, he stated that Barth and Moltmann have made significant contributions to the development of the doctrine of the Trinity in the 20th century, but how their detailed arguments have helped churches practice faith over the past decades, such as their impact on preaching and worship, warrants further exploration.
Lively Discussions
The symposium featured lively discussions in a harmonious atmosphere. The speakers analyzed Barth’s and other theologians’ thoughts from different perspectives, with teachers and students both onsite and online actively raising questions and giving responses, stimulating everyone’s thinking. The speakers further supplemented or explained their points, leading to mutual exchange and learning, making it a wonderful and rich academic feast for the Chinese Christian theological community, which was very beneficial to all.
According to the feedback from participants, most were satisfied with the arrangements of the symposium and found the content rich and profound, which was very helpful to them, deepening their understanding of these theologians and clarifying some misunderstandings of their theological thoughts. Some participants mentioned that the lecture allowed them to understand Barth’s doctrine of the Trinity more comprehensively and begin to grasp the differences between Barth and Moltmann in their theological approaches. In short, most participants enjoyed the meeting and hoped that the seminary would continue to hold such theological academic lectures in the future.
The Beginning of Barth Studies at HKBTS
President Joshua Cho clearly stated at the meeting that this symposium marked the official start of HKBTS’ promotion of Barth studies. He was very pleased that two mainland scholars specializing in Barth’s theology were invited to discuss and explore together, with two teachers from our Division of Christian Thought serving as respondent speakers. President Cho mentioned that in addition to connecting with scholars on the mainland, the seminary is also planning to invite renowned scholars of Barth studies from abroad, such as Bruce McCormack and George Hunsinger from Princeton Theological Seminary, to have exchanges with and learn from each other. This idea is still in development, awaiting its realization in the near future.
Returning to the Substratum for the Learning of Theology
Why does HKBTS promote Barth studies? What is the relationship between this and the practical theology that HKBTS has been promoting?
President Cho stated that HKBTS teachers carry out studies about various theologians, including Paul Tillich, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Jürgen Moltmann, Colin Gunton, Stanley Hauerwas, and Samuel Wells. Among them, many contemporary theologians have been deeply influenced by Barth. Without delving into the origins of their thinking, it would be difficult to understand their development. Barth’s theology can be said to be the substratum of their thoughts. To understand the ideas behind them and to do theology, one must return to this origin and foundation.
The Bible, Theology, Practice
Barth studies are also related to the practical theology that HKBTS has been promoting. HKBTS is committed to constructing practical theology with theological wisdom (theologia), nurturing preachers with theological wisdom to discern the heart of Jesus Christ, to help others to practice their faith with His thoughts and feelings and by following His example, and to respond to the current situation with the right action. Practical theology emphasizes the practical wisdom of theology, which can be concretely applied in pastoral scenarios and situations of social reality. No matter how strong our systematic theology is or how superior our biblical theology is, we ultimately need to return to practical theology.
Practical theology is performative. It begins with praxis and ends with praxis. One approach to practical theology is to start with descriptive-analytical tasks, which reveal the values implicit in praxis. The climax of practical theology is to understand the original praxis and situation and then listen to God’s word and deeply reflect theologically so as to re-understand God’s action in the present and update our praxis accordingly. In other words, these tasks form a cycle that ultimately generates new praxis.
Therefore, when we talk about practical theology, it is not about direct application. It involves much discernment and theological reflection. This requires not only a solid biblical foundation but also a sound theological foundation. If we want to apply the theology of famous contemporary theologians to today’s situations, we cannot simply force it to fit. We cannot just do as a theologian says at a certain place and time. We need to thoroughly understand the theologian’s thoughts, integrate and discern carefully, and determine which elements are applicable to the current era and situation. This is the essence of practical theology.
Therefore, it is necessary to return to the substratum of contemporary theological thought and explore Barth’s theology so as to lay a solid foundation for learning contemporary theology. President Cho also hoped that our study of Barth’s theology could return to the original German texts, rather than relying on translations or the research results of other scholars. The two speakers at this Theological Symposium are both proficient in German and can contribute to churches by studying Barth’s original texts. All these are why HKBTS held the Theological Symposium and began to promote the study of Barth’s theology.
We look forward to HKBTS holding more similar academic activities in the near future, continuing to promote biblical studies, theological thinking, and practical theology so as to assist the church in faithfully abiding by God’s will in this challenging era, developing profound theological thinking on current situations based on the Bible and the guidance and illumination of the Holy Spirit, and putting God’s Word into practice.
