Barth has been charged with modalism, partly because he chose to use the phrase “mode of existence” rather than the term “person” to describe the three in God. The charge doesn’t stick, mainly because Barth clearly understands what modalism is, and claims that it amounts to atheism and a denial of revelation.
Even the phrase itself isn’t modalist. Barth does not call the Father a “mode of operation” or “mode of revelation” of God. The Father is rather a “mode of existence ,” that is, one of the ways in which God is , a mode of God’s being . Since God is always what He is, then three “modes of existence” are eternal features of God’s being. Not modalist at all.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Moral Certitude and the Iran War
The current military engagement with Iran calls renewed attention to just war theory in the Catholic tradition.…
The Slow Death of England: New and Notable Books
The fate of England is much in the news as popular resistance to mass immigration grows, limits…
Ethics of Rhetoric in Times of War
What we say matters. And the way we say it matters. This is especially true in times…
