only himself in contemplation.^80 It is a pity that Barth, who was aware and
appreciative of Hans Urs von Balthasar’s work on Christology, was not equally aware
and appreciative of his work on prayer.^81 There von Balthasar faithfully confesses,
“[t]he object of contemplation is God, and God is trinitarian life; but for us he is life
in the incarnation of the Son, from which we may never withdraw our gaze in
contemplating God.”^82 The only positive statement that I have discovered in Barth’s
usage of contemplation pertains to humanity’s love to God, “[a]s one element in the
activity which puts the love to God into effect, there may be a place for a feeling of
enjoyable contemplation of God.” However, Barth quickly qualifies this, “[b]ut it
cannot take the place of that activity.”^83 Therefore, the freedom to engage in
contemplation is tempered by Barth’s fear that it will reduce the greater priority of
action. This is related to Barth’s foundational concept of actualism. Hunsinger
asserts that it is both “the most distinctive and perhaps the most difficult of [Barth’s]
motifs.” Hunsinger continues, “[a]ctualism emphasizes the sovereign activity of God
in patterns of love and freedom.”^84 Therefore, God’s acts are central to Barth’s
theology because they reveal God’s identity. Christ is also active and according to
Lewis Smedes’ interpretation of Barth, “[t]o be united with Christ means to be doing
something.”^85 Therefore, one could say that actualism places a greater emphasis upon
doing than being. Barth is clear that humanity must also rest and relax so that they
can function properly in doing their work.^86 However, in Barth’s theology “The
Active Life” occupies a central role and his limited comments on contemplation are
(^80) Barth, CD III/4, 562, cf. II/1, 651. (^)
(^81) Barth, CD IV/1, 768.
(^82) von Balthasar, Prayer, 154.
(^83) Barth, CD IV/1, 104.
(^84) Hunsinger, How to Read Barth, 30, cf. 30-2.
(^8586) Smedes, Union with Christ, 14.
Barth, CD III/4, 550-2.