Ontological argument in Catholic and Protestant theology of the 20th century: B. Welte and K. Barth

The article explores how the tradition of considering the existence of God in the famous ontological proof of Anselm of Canterbury was reflected in the work of two seemingly ideologically opposite thinkers: Bernhard Welte and Karl Barth. The question of the existence of God in Catholic theology within the framework of an ontological argument is considered by the example of the theology of B. Welte. In Protestant theology – on the example of the main work of K. Barth’s theology “Fides Quaerens Intellectum”. A comparative analysis will demonstrate the revival of traditional metaphysics in Catholic thought, on the one hand, and the polemic against it in Protestant theology, on the other hand (however, the work chosen by K. Barth will, among other things, show a softening of Barth’s position on Catholic dogmatics compared with the views expressed, for example, in his “Epistle to to the Romans”). One of the goals of the article is to try to find common ground between the positions of the two theologians. Consideration of the traditional ontological proof will serve as the point of intersection at which it is possible to consider not only the difference between the positions of Welte and Barth, but also what can be found in common in their theological thought. Considering the ontological argument, both chosen theologians do not seek to prove it anew (and in this they are close to the tradition of Anselm himself) but rather, consider it within the framework of his contemporary philosophical theology, responding to the challenges of the time, which is especially evident in Welte’s work.

Karl Barth is one of the most famous Protestant theologians of the twentieth century, whose work belongs to the current of dialectical theology and Protestant neo-orthodoxy. Ontological proof has become one of the key issues for Barth’s thought. Bernhard Welte is a twentieth-century Catholic theologian and phenomenologist. His work is characterized by the so-called “renewal” of traditional Catholic theology, which gives it the opportunity to enter into an open dialogue with contemporary philosophical thought.

The tasks of comparing the role of the ontological argument in the work of selected thinkers will allow us to build a holistic view of the revival of Anselm’s argument in the Western theological tradition of the twentieth century.

1. Barth, K. (1958), Fides quaerens intellectum: Anselms Beweis der Existenz Gottes im Zusammenhang seines theologischen Programms, Theologischer Verlag Zürich, Zürich, Germany.

2. Welte, B. (1965), Auf der Spur des Ewigen. Philosophische Abhandlungen über verschiedene Gegenstände der Religion und der Theologie, Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany.

3. Welte, B. (1997), Religionsphilosophie, Knecht, Frankfurt, Germany.

4. Appolonov, A.V. (2018), auka o religii i ee postmodernistskie kritiki [The science of religion and its postmodern critics], HSE Press, Moscow, Russia.

5. Gorin, A.A. (2010), “I. Kant’s and K. Barth’s ontological argument: the elements of typologization”, in Bryushinkin, V.N., ed., X Kantovskie chteniya: Klassicheskii razum i vyzovy sovremennoi tsivilizatsii: materialy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii [10th Kantian Readings. Classical mind and challenges of modern civilization: Proceedings of the international conference], part 2, pp. 175-189.

6. Konacheva, S.A. (2017), “Modern continental philosophical theology: phenomenological-hermeneutical approach”, Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya 1: Bogoslovie. Filosofiya. Religiovedenie, iss. 73. pp. 106-119.

7. Küng, H. (2000), Velikie khristianskie mysliteli [Great Christian thinkers], Aleteiya, Saint Petersburg, Russia.

8. Pylaev, M.A. (2016), “Philosophy and theology in Karl Barth’s neo-Ortodoxy”, Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya 1: Bogoslovie. Filosofiya. Religiovedenie, vol. 68, iss. 6, pp. 26-40.

9. Pylaev, M.A. (2009), “K. Hemmerle’s philosophical phenomenology of the sacred”, Vestnik PSTGU. Seriya 1: Bogoslovie. Filosofiya. Religiovedenie, vol. 28, iss. 4, pp. 29-43.