Uncategorized

Over on his blog, “Non Sermoni Res,” Dr. William Witt has written several excellent essays on the topic of women’s ordination. Here’s the guide that Witt put together in order to orient readers to his essays. What I’ve done is to combine the blog posts into a single PDF, with bookmarks. Here it is: [Witt\_Womens-Ordination-Essays](https://joshuapsteele.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Witt_Womens-Ordination-Essays.pdf)[Download](https://joshuapsteele.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Witt_Womens-Ordination-Essays.pdf)

[Karl Barth’s Church Dogmatics Original Publication Dates, courtesy of PostBarthian.com](https://postbarthian.com/2016/04/21/karl-barths-church-dogmatics-original-publication-dates/).If you’re trying to grasp the contours and contents of Karl Barth’s massive *[Church Dogmatics](https://www.logos.com/product/5758/barths-church-dogmatics),* it helps to have an outline! Here’s a helpful PDF version, with subheadings included, from Princeton’s [Center for Barth Studies](http://barth.ptsem.edu). [Barth\_Outline of Church Dogmatics](https://joshuapsteele.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Barth_Outline-of-Church-Dogmatics.pdf)[Download](https://joshuapsteele.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Barth_Outline-of-Church-Dogmatics.pdf)Below is a version that I’ve created from my Logos edition of *Church Dogmatics*. It’s the version found in the Index (CD V/1, 1–13). (Want to learn more about Karl Barth, but not quite ready to dive into the Church Dogmatics? Check out Keith Johnson’s extremely helpful The Essential Karl Barth: A Reader and Commentary [affiliate link].) ...

John Webster’s Idea Like so many others, I desperately wish that John Webster were still alive. After all, my dissertation topic owes much to his essay: “Reading the Bible: The Example of Barth and Bonhoeffer.” The essay (previously published as ‘“In the Shadow of Biblical Work:” Barth and Bonhoeffer on Reading the Bible,’and then published in Word and Church: Essays in Christian Dogmatics) begins: Two things at least are clear about the relationship of Barth and Bonhoeffer: that disentangling the history of their relation is of considerable importance for making sense of Bonhoeffer, if not of Barth; and that the disentangling is a rather delicate operation which involves some discriminating interpretation of the writings of two complex theologians. Much, for example, hangs on what we are to make of Bonhoeffer’s scattered remarks on Barth, revelation and non-religious interpretation in the prison writings, and of Barth’s puzzled response to them (87). ...

I’ve always wanted to learn more about Andrei Rublev’s famous icon of the Trinity. If you’re also curious, check out this video.