Thesis Abstract The present thesis investigates correlations between a selection of metafictional texts and narrative theory. The selection consists in two sets of self-reflexive texts. The first one explores metafictional tendencies in the 17th and 18th century novels. To achieve this, the selection largely ignores their provenience. In addition to Henry Fielding's Tom Jones and Laurence Sterne's Tristram Shandy, it also examines Cervantes's Don Quixote. The latter set of texts focuses on post-War American metafictions (John Barth's Lost in the Funhouse, Donald Barthelme's Snow White, Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five). These represent a coherent body of works from a particular period. Metafiction is generally understood as fiction about fiction. The present thesis challenges those assumptions and suggests interpreting metafiction within the framework of Michel Foucault's epistemes. Metafiction is not conceived of as a separate genre of literature but in the context of broader cultural tendencies in the understanding of representation. Representation is a key concept in metafiction and the increasing degree of narrative self-awareness is viewed in this light. The thesis emphasizes this contrastive and interdisciplinary approach. The text is divided into five chapters. Chapter one is a theoretical...

‘Simul sanctification' is a transformational program for sanctification derived from Karl Barth's radical appropriation of Luther's dictum simul iustus et peccator. Barth's simul establishes the Christological link of the Second Adam with every human being. From this emerges what I contend is a ‘Chalcedonian anthropology' built on a double-duality: the original Chalcedonian formulation gives rise to a second duality revealed within Christ's one human person—the duality of a true, iustus humanity and a corrupt, peccator humanity. In order to appreciate the benefits regarding Barth's Spirit-charged epistemological program for sanctification and conversion, it will be imperative to elucidate the comprehensive nature of Barth's actualism as a way of establishing Barth's view of humanity's dynamic and free iustitia in Christ. Central to assessing the threat of the peccatum determination will be an examination of Barth's theology of the cross, especially in regards to his single subject economy derived from the person of ‘Jesus Christ and him crucified.' Through Barth's assessment of the cross I exposit the similarities and the differences between Chalcedonian Christology and ‘Chalcedonian anthropology;' the latter duality is proven by resurrection revelation to be ultimately provisional in nature. From here I probe Barth's position regarding the annulment of the simul as well as its beginning. By investigating Barth's doctrine of creation I argue that Barth's simul is reflective of the original antithesis between God and nothingness, the darkness under which Christ first placed himself so that humans would know both his solidarity in the darkness and his victory over it. Christians continue to dwell in the overlap of the simul's two mutually exclusive determinations, but by looking through Barth's simul to our true, created and redeemed humanity in Christ we are equipped to interpret our lives and the world around us most hopefully.

[pt] A presente dissertação se propõe a fazer uma síntese teológica da teologia da graça em Santo Agostinho e da teologia dialética de Karl Barth. E mostrar que, embora os dois tenham usado de base a carta de Paulo aos Romanos para fundamentarem suas respectivas teologias, usaram epistemologias completamente diferentes. Nossa pesquisa tencionar mostrar que, enquanto Santo Agostinho fazia todas as coisas dependerem da Graça Divina, creditando a Cristo o mérito de tudo, Karl Barth ontologizou demais o tema do pecado. Nossa pesquisa objetiva mostrar que, embora os dois trabalharam demais as palavras pecado e redenção, palavras essas que gravitam em toda história da salvação, o escopo da teologia de Santo Agostinho está na graça. Enquanto que, Karl Barth deu mais ênfase a questão do pecado e seu efeito catastrófico, que estabeleceu uma crise entre Deus e o homem. Daí a teologia da crise. Mas também a teologia dialética, que acontece através de uma autodoação e uma autocomunicação entre Deus e a humanidade, pois o Não-Deus foi superado a partir do sim pronunciado através da obra de Cristo. / [en] The present research proposes to make a theological synthesis of the theology of grace in Saint Augustine and the dialectical theology of Karl Barth. And to show that, although the two used Paul s letter to the Romans as a basis to support their respective theologies, they used completely different epistemologies. Our research is intented to show that while St. Augustine made all things depend on Divine Grace, crediting Christ with the merit of everything, Karl Barth over- ontologized the theme of sin. Our research aims to show that, although the two worked too hard on the words sin and redemption, words that gravitate throughout salvation history, the scope of St. Augustine s theology is in grace. Meanwhile, Karl Barth placed more emphasis on the issue of sin and its catastrophic effect, which established a crisis between God and man. Hence the theology of crisis. But also dialectical theology, which takes place through self-giving and self-communication between God and humanity, since the Not-God was overcome from the yes pronounced through the works of Christ.

This thesis explores and examines the concept of the threefold Word of God in the theology of Karl Barth, particularly the third form of the Word of God, the gospel proclamation, and argues that this tertiary form of the Word of God is central to Barth’s own theology of the church. This thesis argues that Karl Barth revised the concept of the threefold Word of God in the later volumes of the Church Dogmatics, but did not seek to reject the concept nor reject Christ’s presence and God’s speech in the gospel declaration and in the life of the Christian community. This thesis argues that the threefold Word of God is a crucial element in Karl Barth’s vision of the church and an important theme for the whole of his theological project. Disregarded by the field of Barth studies and rejected by modern ecclesiologists, Barth’s description of the gospel declaration and its central role in the life together of the Christian community offers an important ecclesiological alternative to carry forward for both Reformed theology and modern ecclesiology. This dissertation makes three significant contributions. First, this thesis is the first of its kind to engage comprehensively with Karl Barth’s concept of the threefold Word of God and to make clear its later revision. Second, this dissertation offers a review of the contemporary scholarly literature related to Barth’s revision of the threefold Word of God, and addresses the theological and ecclesiological implications of this revision. Third, this dissertation makes a contribution to the fields of Barth studies and contemporary ecclesiology by arguing for the central place of the third form of the Word of God in Karl Barth’s conception of the Christian community.

This study brings Christian theology and Christian analytic philosophy into dialogue through an examination of the compatibility and complementarity of Karl Barth’s theology of revelation, and Alvin Plantinga’s epistemology of Christian belief. The first two chapters are aimed at elucidating the central features of Karl Barth’s theology of revelation and clarifying his attitude toward the place of philosophy in theology. We establish that, for Barth, human knowledge of God is objective, personal, cognitive knowing, enabled by the Spirit’s transforming gift of participation in revelation. We dispel the notion that Barth is hostile to philosophy per se and chart the boundaries he gives for its interface with theology. In chapters 3 and 4, we focus on Alvin Plantinga’s Christian epistemology of warranted belief, and its relationship to Barth’s theology of revelation. A general alignment emerges in their shared inductive approach and agreed rejection of the necessity and sufficiency of human arguments for warranted Christian belief. Their contributions are complementary, with Barth providing what Plantinga lacks in theological depth, and Plantinga providing what Barth lacks in philosophical clarity and defense. Despite their general compatibility, two areas of significant potential incompatibility are flagged for closer analysis in the final two chapters. In chapter 5, we consider their views on natural theology. We extend our thesis of complementarity with respect to negative apologetics, and argue for a harmonizing interpretation of their views with respect to a potential positive contribution from natural theology. The final chapter addresses the role of faith and the constitution of a genuine human knowledge of God. We conclude that Barth and Plantinga do not disagree about the personal and propositional character of revelation, but may disagree about the possibility of a generically theistic de re knowledge of God independent of the Spirit’s gift of faith.

Christian faith turns on the claim that God revealed Himself in Jesus of Nazareth and that he is the Lord and Saviour for all humanity. This exclusive claim raises many questions in a pluralistic and multi-cultural world. In particular it seems to be both excluding and therefore to presuppose various kinds of violence towards others. This research endeavors to address such questions by seeing what can be learned from the Swiss theologian Karl Barth. Barth is a good test case because of his famous Christological concentration. He is often taken as a paradigm ‘exclusivist’. Situating Barth in his historical and intellectual context I shall argue that Barth formulates a Christologically inclusive humanism that addresses the supposed tolerance of Liberal theology, the actual violence of anti Semitism, secularizing understandings of community and the imperial mentality of Western Christendom towards non-Christian religions. By adapting a scripturally informed rationality which is cultivated in the Christian community, Barth expounds (1) a Christologically based tolerance towards non-Christian others (Chapter one); (2) a covenantal understanding of Jewish-Christian solidarity (Chapter two); (3) an ethic of the neighbours which grounds solidarity with poor, marginalized and oppressed communities (Chapter three); (4) a Christological anthropology which respects the irreducible otherness of others (Chapter four); (5) a politics of community which celebrates the community of near and distant neighbours (Chapter five); and, based on the above understandings, (6) a self-critical theology of religion for grounding interfaith encounter (Chapter six). By way of conclusion, I argue that Barth’s theology should not be understood on postmodern lines but that it accentuates the universal in the particular. For this reason, I claim that Barth’s theology, though Christologically based, is capable of contributing to a global responsibility for building a society of love and justice. As a Chinese scholar, I also argue that Barth can contribute to a burgeoning Chinese theological tradition, advancing a Christologically based humanism in a multi-religious and cultural society.

La présente dissertation se propose d'étudier la problématique de l'unicité et de l'universalité de Jésus-Christ dans la christologie contemporaine. Le choix de ce thème a été motivé par le fait que pendant ces dernières années la confrontation avec le pluralisme culturel et religieux a conduit la théologie chrétienne à réfléchir de manière nouvelle sur cette question. Elle porte sur le christianisme en tant qu'il a pour spécificité de rendre témoignage à un homme confessé comme le Fils unique de Dieu et le Sauveur de tous les hommes. Dans ce sens, la finalité de notre recherche est de montrer la signification et la portée de l'affirmation de Jésus-Christ comme unique Médiateur de notre salut, et ce dans le cadre de la théologie fondamentale et en particulier de la christologie. Bien que cette doctrine ait été toujours et soit encore une pierre d'achoppement pour ceux qui ne partagent pas notre foi, elle représente pour la tradition chrétienne plus qu'une croyance centrale, elle est vue comme le fondement même de la foi. Pour montrer la pertinence du sujet traité, ainsi que les chemins à suivre afin de proposer de nouvelles perspectives pour la réflexion théologique, notre point de départ est l'analyse du phénomène de la multiplication des modèles interprétatifs concernant le rapport entre le christianisme et les autres religions. Les recherches menées par Peter Schineller, Joseph Gelot, Paul Knitter, Camil Ménard et Jacques Dupuis dans ce domaine, nous ont permis de nous familiariser avec le vocabulaire utilisé dans la discussion (exclusivisme, inclusivisme, pluralisme, etc.) et de percevoir les possibles relations entre les modèles proposés. Du point de vue de notre travail, ces analyses montrent d'une part que la question christologique se trouve au cœur du débat, et d'autre part que l'enjeu de celui-ci se situe dans la manière dont les théologiens cités comme représentants de chaque modèle, chacun à partir de ses propres présupposés, traitent la question de l'unicité et de l'universalité du Christ. C'est cette double constatation qui nous a amené à choisir d'étudier la pensée de cinq théologiens contemporains: Karl Barth, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Edward Schillebeeckx, Karl Rahner et John Hick. La partie conclusive de la thèse expose les perspectives christologiques qui se dégagent de la recherche. Elle offre une esquisse élaborée avec la conviction que la christologie ne se limite pas à offrir un répertoire d'opinions sur le Christ, mais qu'elle est une réflexion dynamique et attentive aux défis qui lui sont adressés. Notre étude conduit, d'une part, à une prise de distance critique vis-à-vis des modèles ou catégories qui sont proposés aujourd'hui pour expliquer la pluralité d'opinions concernant l'unicité et l'universalité de Jésus-Christ. Ils ont certainement une pertinence pédagogique, ensemble ils constituent une sorte de carte géographique qui offre des points de repères dans un terrain devenu assez complexe. Néanmoins cette «nouvelle vulgate», selon l'expression de G. Comeau, qui a fortement marqué les esprits, perd de sa pertinence lorsqu'elle est considérée comme l'exposé d'une «évolution naturelle» dans le débat. D'autre part, l'examen de la théologie des auteurs permet d'identifier les présupposés christologiques qui doivent être pris en compte pour traiter la question de l'unicité et de l'universalité du Christ. Premièrement, l'universel concret, parce que la christologie est appelée à réfléchir sur les polarités dialectiques qui caractérisent le mystère: l'Absolu et le fini, l'Universel et le concret, l'humanité et la divinité; deuxièmement le christocentrisme, qui permet une révalorisation de l'histoire du salut comme horizon théologique propre de la place du Christ dans le projet de Dieu; enfin la relation entre personne et mission de Jésus-Christ, qui témoigne du tournant sotériologique opéré dans la christologie contemporaine et qui met en évidence la manière dont l'homme participe à la vie divine. Nous avons identifié aussi deux éléments qui caractérisent le Christ comme unique et universel: l'affirmation de Jésus-Christ comme Médiateur de la volonté salvifique universel de Dieu, et l'incarnation par laquelle s'exprime l'identité personnelle de Jésus.

This thesis aims to contribute to an answer to the question, “What would a philosophy, and more specifically, an ethics, based on Christ, look like?” My first contention is that we find, in the ethical thinking of Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer, two particularly radical and complementary attempts to point toward Christ as the basis or foundation of any genuine ethics. What sets the views of Barth and Bonhoeffer apart from many of the other philosophical and theological approaches to ethics, is the extent to which they seek to take seriously the ethical implications of the gospel – the revelation of God's grace in the Word and work of Jesus Christ – for ethics. My second contention is that, even if we follow neither Barth nor Bonhoeffer in the detailed outworking of the character of a Christologically grounded ethics, we nevertheless cannot avoid facing the radical challenge each of these men poses, in their own related but distinct ways, that in thinking about ethics we must take Christ as our standard and foundation. In the first two chapters, on Barth and Bonhoeffer respectively, I identify the structure and content of their arguments and display their textual basis in the texts most relevant to the topic, namely Barth’s Church Dogmatics and Bonhoeffer’s Ethics. I also present an outline of the character of a Christologically-grounded ethics as each of these theologians derives it from its Christological basis. In the third chapter I examine the cogency of their arguments.

Zugl.: Princeton, New Jersey, Univ., Diss., 2006 u.d.T.: Marga, Amy: Partners in gospel

Thesis (M.A.)--Wheaton College Graduate School, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 141-152).