It would seem that theology, for Barth is an 'event'. It is to be involved in an ongoing dialogue about the ultimate ongoing dialogue: the one that is being conducted between God and humanity, through Jesus Christ. This is a kind of sacred speech-act of the most profound and beautiful kind. This is 'cultivated' theology and it can never be fixed. We live and add to this dialogue with prayer (about man and addressed to God) and sermon (about God and addressed to man). We participate in the sacred speech act just as we participate in the life of God through Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. Engaging in theology must not alienate through language. We are exhorted to be inclusive. Barth's aim is always to welcome and never to reject, and if he is guilty of universalism, it is fueled by this motive too. He hopes the euangelion is just that; in fact, that we make it 'great' news not just 'good news', and we need to use a range of lexicons to do this to suit our audiences. There is an insistence that we always proclaim it in ways that are positive.
Now the Calvinists seem, and my knowledge of them is limited, to proclaim it in ways which are somewhat negative. But I'm prepared to learn that it might be otherwise. It will be interesting to find out. Peter Ould recently concluded that more people seem to be attentive to the Conservative evangelical blogs than they do to the more Open ones. He drew his own conclusions from this. I, personally, think that it is symptomatic of the human condition, or at least it is in my case. I find it quite hard to totally believe that I am perfect in God's sight, that I have been clothed with the cloak of Christ's righteousness and might really cry out to God, 'Abba' 'Daddy', knowing that I am his precious daughter. I find instead that I need to feel unworthy. It is a kind of unhealthy self-flagellation and the more conservative and Calvinistic (if that's a word), the more this strange perversion is satisfied.