Hans Vium Mikkelsen's book Reconciled Humanity is a well-written and reflective book on the contemporary relevance of Karl Barth's theology. While the author clearly demonstrates a broad knowledge of Barth's writings, the book is not merely devoted to an account of Barth's theology. Mikkelsen's approach to Barth's work is determined by questions and problems which shape the current theological debates. Mikkelsen writes: ‘In this way I hope to be able to skip the all-too-often established dichotomy between Barthians and non-Barthians’ (p. xi).
The book thus seeks to find a balance between questions of method and an account of the content of Barth's actual reflections. It moves from the question of Bible and revelation, over theological anthropology, finally to engage the question of atonement and reconciliation ‘from below’. The direction of the book, moving from a reflection on humanity, creation and sin to the saving work of Jesus Christ, is an interesting structural choice in a work which engages Barth's method. This shift matches the focus of the book, which is deeply concerned with theological anthropology and the question of the role of the human nature of Jesus Christ in Barth's thinking.
Mikkelsen's reading points to the openness of Barth's theology and he defends the view that theology ‘can never be reduced to a purely theoretical system which does not include within itself a reference to the actual life of the individual being’ (p. 59). There is no neutral knowledge of God's Word. It demands commitment. For Mikkelsen the religious experience of the believing Christian is therefore a key to understanding the contemporary relevance of Barth's theology. To support this interpretation Mikkelsen brings Barth into dialogue with the great nineteenth-century theologian Friedrich Schleiermacher and stresses the overlap between the two thinkers. By using the anthropologist René Girard's theory of the scapegoat mechanism, Mikkelsen brings out some new aspects of Barth's thinking: Girard's thoughts on the relationship between violence and the sacred is sure to prove useful for tying Barth's theology to the broader question of human religious behaviour.
The real thrust of Mikkelsen's contemporary reading of Barth appears in part III: the reconsideration of Barth's concept of God's being. Mikkelsen argues that Barth is very reluctant to say that God's essence has been changed in the incarnation. Mikkelsen writes: ‘God is the precondition for history, which according to Barth implies that he cannot undergo any changes during his interaction with history’ (p. 258). The question then becomes whether God is capable of real mutual interaction with the world? By shifting the accent from a Christology from above to a Christology from below, Mikkelsen sees a possibility for remedying this potential problem in Barth's theology. However, Mikkelsen does not engage with Barth's explicit work on the doctrine of God in CD II/1. In that volume Barth defines God as ‘the one who loves in freedom’. Would not this understanding of God's essence make it possible to affirm both immutability (God's essence as freedom and love is affirmed in all God's acts), and simultaneously allow God to be open to change in a way Mikkelsen would find acceptable? By not engaging Barth's doctrine of God, Mikkelsen leaves this question open. However, with this important question left open, and considering the strong focus on anthropology and religious experience, it is not obvious that the actual sache of Barth's theology is addressed in this dialogue with contemporary theology.
Reconciled Humanity: Karl Barth in Dialogue is a knowledgeable reflection on Karl Barth's theology. Drawing on a number of theologians and philosophers of religion, it provides new lenses through which to engage Barth's thinking and draws attention to areas of his work which have not yet been wrestled with, such as the questions of violence, the sacred and a possible dialogue with the anthropology of religion.
