Does anyone know where I can find an English translation of a book containing Karl Barth's sermons from 1934 to 1948, [*Fürchte dich nicht! - Predigten aus den Jahren 1934 bis 1948*](https://archive.org/details/frchtedichnichtp0000bart/page/n5/mode/2up) , published in 1949?

I recently learned that [Karl Barth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Barth) , while he was married, had a decades-long romantic relationship with his personal assistant, Charlotte von Kirschbaum. She actually moved into the Barths' home in 1929, straining the family. I'd like to know how Karl Barth justified this relationship. After a few internet searches and my own recollections of Barth's theology, the following possibilities come to mind: 1. Barth did not have a sexual relationship with von Kirschbaum, and therefore did not think that he was committing adultery 2. Barth, who argued that the Bible "contains" the Word of God, did not consider the prohibition of adultery in the Ten Commandments as "the Word of God" and therefore not binding 3. Barth could not overcome his love for von Kirschbaum, and thus considered it acceptable. Which of these arguments, or others that I might be missing, did Barth use? **How did Barth justify his relationship with von Kirschbaum?**

[Karl Barth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Barth) (1886–1968) is considered noteworthy for allegedly "recovering the doctrine of the Trinity in the 20th century." He is considered a reformed theologian, but his views are generally not considered classically reformed by confessional reformed bodies. He heavily emphasized the doctrine of the Trinity in his writings. Was his view consistent with the ecumenical creeds of the early church? I'm wondering if at any point his doctrine of the Trinity was not orthodox. That is, if he is not classically reformed in his formulation of the Trinity, is he still orthodox?

I ran across a book on Amazon called [*Karl Barth, Catholic Renewal and Vatican II*](http://www.amazon.com/Catholic-Renewal-Vatican-Systematic-Theology-ebook/dp/B007VN2ZYI) . It seems strange to me that [Karl Barth](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Barth) , a neo-orthodox Protestant, would have an impact like what the book's blurb says: > From the 1920s on, Karl Barth’s thought was received with great interest not only by Protestants but also by Catholic theologians, who analyzed it in detail. [...] Dahlke shows how the preoccupation with Barth's 'Epistle to the Romans' and the ‘Church Dogmatics’ triggered a theological renewal among Catholic theologians. What is an overview of Barth's impact on Roman Catholic theology?