Why Barth changed his mind: retrieval and rejection of the <i>extra Calvinisticum</i> in the theology of Karl Barth

Abstract Over the course of his career, Karl Barth changed his mind on the extra Calvinisticum , moving from a robust early affirmation to a final rejection in the later volumes of the Church Dogmatics . This article traces that theological shift, arguing that it was not incidental but necessitated by the internal logic of Barth’s doctrine of revelation. In contrast to recent trajectories that seek to retrieve the extra in defence of divine impassibility, Barth’s rejection was grounded in a conviction that God’s being is identical with God’s act – most fully revealed in Jesus Christ. This christological pressure led Barth to revise the scope and function of the extra until it became theologically untenable. The article situates this shift within the broader historical development of the doctrine and concludes by exploring its implications for reconciliation, kenosis, and divine ontology in contemporary theology.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scottish Journal of Theology
Published
2026-02-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0036930626101550
Primary Topic
Karl Barth and Christian Theology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Why Barth changed his mind: retrieval and rejection of the extra Calvinisticum in the theology of Karl Barth

Jason T. Eslicker
Scottish Journal of Theology
Karl Barth and Christian Theology
article

Why Barth changed his mind: retrieval and rejection of the extra Calvinisticum in the theology of Karl Barth

Jason T. Eslicker
article en

Abstract

Abstract Over the course of his career, Karl Barth changed his mind on the extra Calvinisticum , moving from a robust early affirmation to a final rejection in the later volumes of the Church Dogmatics . This article traces that theological shift, arguing that it was not incidental but necessitated by the internal logic of Barth’s doctrine of revelation. In contrast to recent trajectories that seek to retrieve the extra in defence of divine impassibility, Barth’s rejection was grounded in a conviction that God’s being is identical with God’s act – most fully revealed in Jesus Christ. This christological pressure led Barth to revise the scope and function of the extra until it became theologically untenable. The article situates this shift within the broader historical development of the doctrine and concludes by exploring its implications for reconciliation, kenosis, and divine ontology in contemporary theology.

Scottish Journal of Theology
Duke University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Karl Barth and Christian Theology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.