increasingly self-focused.^58 By the time of the nineteenth-century Barth contends
that, “[e]ven Reformation praise of God disappears in the gurgling gullet of modern
religious self-confession.”^59 Barth is alarmed by the changing landscape of increased
subjectivity and romanticism in hymnody and believes this danger created two results,
“[f]irst, Jesus Christ would cease to be understood unequivocally as the Lord; and
second, we ourselves would consequently come to usurp the center which rightfully
belongs to him.”^60 Before departing this discussion a brief comment is needed
regarding the interaction between the intellect and the affect. While obviously Barth
recognizes their importance he does not appear to provide any sustained development
of their interaction. However he briefly mentions in a lecture on Calvin given in
Paris, “theology...moves the head and heart most fully.”^61
It is now possible to examine Barth’s understanding of mysticism as a case
study of his theology of experience. Perhaps surprisingly to some readers Barth
acknowledges the legitimacy of a certain type of mysticism. Referring to Paul in
Galatians 2:20 Barth apprehensively questions, “[i]s this mysticism? Well, if and so
far as it is mysticism, then Paul too was a mystic.... If this is mysticism, then
mysticism is an indispensable part of the Christian faith.” Barth also reveals an
appreciation for “Bernard’s mysticism, with its strongly Christological character” and
did not believe it should “be regarded as mysticism in the more dubious sense.”
(^58) Barth, CD I/2, 254.
(^59) Barth, CD I/2, 256.
(^60) Hunsinger, How to Read Barth, 40. Barth declares, “[t]he self-satisfied man rests
upon himself and has no need of God.” 61 CD I/2, 263.
Busch, Karl Barth: His Life, 244. For Barth on reason see Mangina, Barth:
Theologian of Christian Witnessthe Christian Life, 125-63. , 49. For Barth on affectivity see Mangina, Barth on