it seems appropriate to reflect on Barth's revisionist understanding of election and his critique of the Canons of Dort.The purpose of this contribution is not to give a complete overview of Barth's doctrine of election. That would be impossible to do in a few pages. The purpose is firstly, to investigate Barth's explicit references to the Canons of Dort in Kirchliche Dogmatik II/2 (KD II/2), and secondly, to make some remarks on the revisionist character of Barth's understanding of election. Barth's use of the Canons of Dort does not seem to attract much scholarly attention. Some historical background are included to create context for the reading of Barth's understanding of election and references to the Canons of Dort.Many reformed churches will commemorate the Synod of Dort (1618-1619) during its 400-year centenary, but it will not receive the same attention everywhere. For many the Synod of Dort epitomises the reformed tradition and what it means to be reformed (Selderhuis 2015:XV). Even theologians critical of formulations in the Canons of Dort 1 would agree that the doctrine of election has, at least historically, a very specific place in reformed theology. Karl Barth ([1942] 1957) wrote:It is a well-known historical fact that more than any other doctrine the doctrine of predestination 2 stamped itself upon the face of the Reformed Church, or rather of 16th and 17th century theology, thus distinguishing it from others. (p. 36) Opposing views on election had been the source of much controversy during the long history of especially, the Latin or Western church. The opposing interpretations of election (including original sin, grace, free will, election and rejection) as articulated by Augustine of Hippo in opposition to Pelagius, Martin Luther in opposition to Desiderius Erasmus and John Calvin in opposition to Albert Pighius are well known. A 100 years after Luther posted his 95 theses against the indulgences, the Synod of Dort tried to resolve the opposing interpretations of election as articulated by the Dutch Remonstrants and Contra-Remonstrants by formulating the Canons of Dort. Despite the tremendous effort and dedication of the delegates to the Synod of Dort, it still was not the final word. Often the Canons of Dort were defended fervently; sometimes criticised as contrary to Scripture; sometimes ignored by dissenting theologians and clergy in fear of losing their position in the church. As a result, Herman Bavinck (1928:332), (following Theodor Kaftan) was of the opinion that the doctrine of election received very little attention in modern theology. 1.See Jonker (1994:146-147) for a short overview, specifically his comments on the 1970 decision of the Gereformeerde Kerken Nederland (GKN) which rejected the Canons of Dort's exposition of eternal rejection. The Synod of the Reformed Churches had been influenced by the views of G.C. Berkouwer, for years the leading theologian of the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands and professor of Systematic Theology at the Free University (VU) in Amsterdam. Berk...
