The Task of Theology
(1) As theologians, we ought to speak of God. (2) But we are humans and as such cannot speak of God. (3) We ought to do both, to know the "ought" and the "not able to," and precisely in this way give God the glory. . . .
(3) The Word of God is the necessary but impossible task of theology. This is the conclusion to everything I have said up until this point. It is actually all that I have to say on this topic. Now what? Does it mean a return to the low country [Barth spoke earlier of a theologian as walking atop a narrow mountain ridge] where one appears to be a theologian but in reality is something completely different, something that others can be too, causing them to fundamentally not need us?
I am afraid that even if we were capable of such a tour de force, the logic of the matter would soon lead us right back to where we stand now. Or should we move from a service of the word to a service of silence? As if it were easier and more possible to be still before God (really before God), than to speak of him! What kind of game is this supposed to be? Should theology just bid its farewell? Should we hang up our hats and become happy, like other people?
But people are not happy. If they were, we would not be here. The pressure of our task is a sign of the plight of every other human task. If we were not here, other theologians would then be in the same situation. A mother cannot walk away from her children and the shoemaker cannot walk away from his block, and we cannot be convinced that the dialectic of the children's nursery is any less effective than the dialectic of our theological study halls.
Giving up theology makes as little sense as taking of one's life--nothing will come of it, and nothing will change by doing so. So, persevere. That is all. We ought to know both the necessity and the impossibility of our task.
Karl Barth, The Word of God and Theology, pp. 177, 195, emphasis added.
| 
