The lack of discrimination of Mr. Blanshard's critique of Karl Barth reflects a good deal of exasperation that so much attention is paid to a writer the substance of whose thought is anachronistic, whose method is an "incoherent patchwork", and whose language is "gibberish". Certainly "The Achievement of Barth" has never been more tepidly described than in Mr. Blanshard's paragraph of that title.¹ And the secret of Barth's success, or notoriety, he estimates to be found in his "Lutheran self-confidence, energy and pugnacity".