In this second revised and updated edition of Election, Barth and the French Connection -How Pierre Maury gave a ‘decisive impetus’ to Karl Barth’s doctrine of election, there are three new contributors including:
Dr Damon Adams of Alphacrucis College in Hobart, Tasmania, who has a background in the Orthodox Presbyterian church and studied and taught at Knox Seminary in Sydney. His essay will look at Karl Barth’s Influence on Contemporary Christian Universalism. He says that “Barth’s Christocentric approach to theology led him on a trajectory well beyond the semblance of orthodox Reformed theology.”
Dr Leo Stossich (a Pentecostal Pastor and published author, also of Hobart) has entitled his essay The Human Election of God with sub-headings The Election of Grace, the Holy Spirit and Human Freedom. He maintains that – “True freedom, for Barth, is not freedom as independence nor the freedom to choose between options. Freedom is not being able to say yes or no to God. Barth says: The decisive point is whether freedom in the Christian sense is identical with the freedom of Hercules: a choice between two ways at a crossroads. This is a heathen notion of freedom. Is it freedom to decide for the devil? The only freedom that means something is the freedom to be myself as I am created by God. God did not create a neutral creature, but His creature.” 
 Barth in Godsey, Table Talk, 37.
Dr Michael O’Neil of Vose Seminary (Baptist) in Perth, Western Australia, is exploring the relation between election and proclamation in Barth’s doctrine of election, in the hope of highlighting more explicitly Barth’s pastoral and homiletical orientation in the preaching of the gospel based on Barth’s three essays on the proclamation of grace in God, Here and Now. He has entitled his essay: The Light of the Gospel: Election and Proclamation. He believes that the many universalist statements in Barth’s chapter on election should be understood in terms of the proclamation of the gospel; that is, we are to preach the universal and objective reconciliation accomplished in Christ. He postulates that the fate of those who do not live in obedience to their election, however, remains in God’s hands, as we see with the many statements in the chapter which speak of the (impossible) judgement which still threatens them.
Dr Matthias Gockel (University of Basel) has updated his essay, while those of Dr Mark Lindsay (Trinity Theological College, University of Divinity, Melbourne) & Dr John Capper (University of Divinity) will remain basically unchanged. I will be adding some new material to my introduction as well as responding to the new contributions.
Dr John McDowell (University of Divinity, Melbourne) has revised his afterword, which is now entitled: Being and Becoming in Gratuity: Barth After Maury, in which he suggests that ‘that what Barth may have taken from Maury has been a particular sharpening of his own theological trajectory‘ and that ‘what impressed Barth about Maury’s “instructive contribution” was not only its vigor and freshness in an otherwise theologically stale setting, but the hermeneutic expressly regulating it. From Barth’s account of the matter, he reveled specifically in the lecture’s drawing out “the Christological meaning and basis of the doctrine of election” (CD, II.2, 154)‘.
My translations of Pierre Maury’s works ‘Election and Faith’, ‘Ultimate Decision’ and ‘Predestination’ have been completely revised and I express my thanks to input from Professor Pierre-Sovann Chauny of Calvin Seminary, Aix-en-Provence, France for his suggestions particularly with regard to ‘Election and Faith’.
This new, revised, updated and expanded edition will appear later in 2019. Watch this space!
Simon Hattrell, Editor and Translator.