As I make my way through portions of Barth's Church Dogmatics, it's been fun to see Barth refer to Bonhoeffer. There were several references in my seminar reading for this week - selections from volume III, The Doctrine of Creation. I'll set up the scene here for one of my favorite Bonhoeffer shout outs...
In Church Dogmatics III/4 Barth takes up the issue of ethics and identifies it as a task of the doctrine of creation. Here, he describes how ethics cannot be detached from dogmatics. He explains: "In books and lectures ethics can be treated independently, that is, in external separation from dogmatics, so long as it is presupposed that this separation is understood and treated as purely technical and therefore that dogmatics is not detached from its ethical content and direction and that the question of dogmatics remains paramount and decisive in ethics" (p. 3).
Basically, Barth is saying that how we think about ethical actions cannot be separated from what we think and believe about God. I was reminded of Bonhoeffer here, and so was Barth. Take a look at what Barth now says in the notes: "And the same attitude to the link with dogmatics is a commendable feature of the brilliant Ethik of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, which unfortunately exists only in a fragmentary and provisional form" (because Bonhoeffer was arrested by the Gestapo while he was still working on the project).
That's right - the brilliant Ethics of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. And here's one reason why I gather Barth thinks so.
Barth: "The task of theological ethics is to understand the Word of God as the command of God" (p. 4).
Bonhoeffer: "Those who wish to focus on the problem of a Christian ethic are faced with an outrageous demand - from the outset they must give up, as inappropriate to this topic, the very two questions that led them to deal with the ethical problem: "How can I be good?" and "How can I do something good?" Instead they must ask the wholly other, completely different question: what is the will of God?" (Ethics, 47).
Brilliant. Ethics - for Barth and Bonhoeffer - does not and can not exist apart from the Word and will of God. Now, certainly there is a distinction between the Word and will of God; but the point is that for both of these theologians the ethical question is ultimately a matter of theological orientation which finds its starting point in the revelation of God in Jesus Christ. Ethics is not a question of doing something good. Ethics is obedience to the command of God. What does that mean? Well, more than I am going to get into now... I recommend reading - you guessed it - Barth and Bonhoeffer.
I'm writing this quarter on Barth, Bonhoeffer, and revelation... but this ethics connection is tugging at me as well... I guess I'll have to put it in the hopper for another paper.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Friday, April 15, 2011
Encounters at the 2011 Kuyper Conference on Calvinism and Culture
The 2011 Kuyper Conference on Calvinism and Culture at Princeton Seminary is not over yet, but I wanted to make note of a couple of interesting sessions and resources that I had the chance to be part of today.
First off, I have to say I've been quite impressed especially with the work of my Fuller colleagues so far. There are eight of us students from Fuller here together at the conference, and five are presenting papers! It's great to be further building friendships and connections with people that are not directly in my narrow Bonhoeffer field of study. The Neo-Calvinist crowd is gracious and welcoming, and we have a good time drawing connections between Bonhoeffer, Neo-Calvinism, and the rest of life. Look for some of their work in "The Kuyper Center Review," volume 2, and, in the forthcoming volume 3.
Several of the papers I heard today had to do with the arts and the biblical text. David Koyzis from Redeemer University College is working on re-setting all of the psalms to traditional Genevan melodies. His project aims to make the psalms singable again, and he creatively works to match the words with the appropriate musical patterns. His website currently provides music and downloadable .pdf files for almost half of the psalms, and he's adding more all of the time.
The other artist I wanted to bring to your attention was a plenary speaker, John Harvey, the Director of the Centre for Studies in the Visual Culture of Religion in Aberystwyth University, Wales. He's doing fascinating work providing visual and aural approaches to imaging the Bible. As an artist, he's concerned with providing a stark image of the biblical text itself. As such, he takes an austere, abstract approach, and the outcomes are striking. I wish his website provided more of the background and explanation to his art - it was incredibly interesting to hear about his method and approach to crafting a piece of art work or music. Basically, he works from a grid system, where each letter of a verse is assigned a specific number and then color value. It's much more complicated and thoughtful than that, but at least you can begin to get some perspective to what he is doing when you look through the gallery. Meditating on the scripture in this way visually - as opposed to a traditional pictorial representation of a biblical event - really does draw you into each letter of the text. He also does similarly fascinating work imaging scripture aurally.
I also wanted to make note of a comment that Prof Harvey made during the question and answer time. A gentleman identified himself as a pastor, and asked how he thought that the art work could be used in a congregational setting. I myself thought this was an interesting question, and was already forming ideas of how special services of mediation could be set up. But then Harvey answered in a way I wasn't expecting - he said that as an artist, he has a knee jerk reaction to that kind of comment. He explained that he doesn't create the art to be utilitarian - that is, he doesn't make it to be in the service of the church. The art stands on its own, and can't rely on the church to bring it meaning and value. I soon realized that this was a perfect Neo-Calvinist response, because it affirms the inherent truth, meaning, and value of the distinct sphere of art. Now, certainly, his art work has Christian foundations which inform the creation of the work, but he explained that his work is for the gallery, not for the church. It is in the gallery, in the realm that is separate and unique from the church, that the art is allowed to be true. What is exciting, is that the art, hanging on a gallery wall, witnesses to the truth and sovereignty of Jesus Christ as much if not more so than it would in a church.
These are just two of the many interesting projects that I am encountering here. I share these with you in part because of the ability to link to their work on the web. I'd also encourage you to look at the program for this year's conference, if even just to see the kind of work that is currently being done, thanks to the Neo-Calvinist perspective of engagement with the world.
First off, I have to say I've been quite impressed especially with the work of my Fuller colleagues so far. There are eight of us students from Fuller here together at the conference, and five are presenting papers! It's great to be further building friendships and connections with people that are not directly in my narrow Bonhoeffer field of study. The Neo-Calvinist crowd is gracious and welcoming, and we have a good time drawing connections between Bonhoeffer, Neo-Calvinism, and the rest of life. Look for some of their work in "The Kuyper Center Review," volume 2, and, in the forthcoming volume 3.
Several of the papers I heard today had to do with the arts and the biblical text. David Koyzis from Redeemer University College is working on re-setting all of the psalms to traditional Genevan melodies. His project aims to make the psalms singable again, and he creatively works to match the words with the appropriate musical patterns. His website currently provides music and downloadable .pdf files for almost half of the psalms, and he's adding more all of the time.
The other artist I wanted to bring to your attention was a plenary speaker, John Harvey, the Director of the Centre for Studies in the Visual Culture of Religion in Aberystwyth University, Wales. He's doing fascinating work providing visual and aural approaches to imaging the Bible. As an artist, he's concerned with providing a stark image of the biblical text itself. As such, he takes an austere, abstract approach, and the outcomes are striking. I wish his website provided more of the background and explanation to his art - it was incredibly interesting to hear about his method and approach to crafting a piece of art work or music. Basically, he works from a grid system, where each letter of a verse is assigned a specific number and then color value. It's much more complicated and thoughtful than that, but at least you can begin to get some perspective to what he is doing when you look through the gallery. Meditating on the scripture in this way visually - as opposed to a traditional pictorial representation of a biblical event - really does draw you into each letter of the text. He also does similarly fascinating work imaging scripture aurally.
I also wanted to make note of a comment that Prof Harvey made during the question and answer time. A gentleman identified himself as a pastor, and asked how he thought that the art work could be used in a congregational setting. I myself thought this was an interesting question, and was already forming ideas of how special services of mediation could be set up. But then Harvey answered in a way I wasn't expecting - he said that as an artist, he has a knee jerk reaction to that kind of comment. He explained that he doesn't create the art to be utilitarian - that is, he doesn't make it to be in the service of the church. The art stands on its own, and can't rely on the church to bring it meaning and value. I soon realized that this was a perfect Neo-Calvinist response, because it affirms the inherent truth, meaning, and value of the distinct sphere of art. Now, certainly, his art work has Christian foundations which inform the creation of the work, but he explained that his work is for the gallery, not for the church. It is in the gallery, in the realm that is separate and unique from the church, that the art is allowed to be true. What is exciting, is that the art, hanging on a gallery wall, witnesses to the truth and sovereignty of Jesus Christ as much if not more so than it would in a church.
These are just two of the many interesting projects that I am encountering here. I share these with you in part because of the ability to link to their work on the web. I'd also encourage you to look at the program for this year's conference, if even just to see the kind of work that is currently being done, thanks to the Neo-Calvinist perspective of engagement with the world.
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Barth, Bonhoeffer, and a theology of revelation
This quarter I'm taking a Karl Barth seminar and am focusing my research on the influence of Barth on Bonhoeffer's theology of revelation. 'Revelation' is the foundation for the theology of discipleship that I am working on, so this should be a very fruitful and exciting opportunity to further my understanding of Bonhoeffer in this area.
I'm starting by getting a thorough overview of Barth's influence on Bonhoeffer by reading Andreas Pangritz's Karl Barth in the Theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Pangritz focuses his research by honing in on Bonhoeffer's critique of Barth's "positivism of revelation," in Letters and Papers from Prison. I'm still working through the book, but so far am pleased with the depth and insight that Pangritz is offering. One of the big questions that Barth and Bonhoeffer scholars have is what Bonhoeffer could have meant in this accusation of "positivism of revelation" in Barth - even Barth himself was not sure what to make of Bonhoeffer's comments. Pangritz treats the whole question and context quite well and so is proving to be a very valuable resource.
I think my research may focus more on Bonhoeffer's earlier work. I'm particularly interested in seeing where I can find Barth's influence in Creation and Fall, for example. Since Bonhoeffer's theology is always developing throughout his career, I think it's important to see where he begins in his understanding of revelation. I will also be curious to see if I can trace nuanced developments of revelation as Bonhoeffer progresses through his middle and later period.
Theological method is the basis, the presuppositions, that someone has when they begin to address theological questions. Barth's work challenged the prevailing theological method of his time by insisting that theology must begin with God's revelation of himself toward humanity, and not with the human pursuit of the knowledge of God. Bonhoeffer was one of the early adopters of Barth's method, though certainly did not just accept all of the implications or outworkings (as we see in Letters and Papers).
It is important, then, to have a starting point when we talk about a theology of discipleship. I'm going to take Barth and Bonhoeffer's lead as I put forth the conviction that only because God freely chooses to reveal himself to us through Jesus Christ can we live and move in a life of discipleship. We'll have to give it a few weeks (for starters) of research and writing to see how this all comes together.
I'm starting by getting a thorough overview of Barth's influence on Bonhoeffer by reading Andreas Pangritz's Karl Barth in the Theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Pangritz focuses his research by honing in on Bonhoeffer's critique of Barth's "positivism of revelation," in Letters and Papers from Prison. I'm still working through the book, but so far am pleased with the depth and insight that Pangritz is offering. One of the big questions that Barth and Bonhoeffer scholars have is what Bonhoeffer could have meant in this accusation of "positivism of revelation" in Barth - even Barth himself was not sure what to make of Bonhoeffer's comments. Pangritz treats the whole question and context quite well and so is proving to be a very valuable resource.
I think my research may focus more on Bonhoeffer's earlier work. I'm particularly interested in seeing where I can find Barth's influence in Creation and Fall, for example. Since Bonhoeffer's theology is always developing throughout his career, I think it's important to see where he begins in his understanding of revelation. I will also be curious to see if I can trace nuanced developments of revelation as Bonhoeffer progresses through his middle and later period.
Theological method is the basis, the presuppositions, that someone has when they begin to address theological questions. Barth's work challenged the prevailing theological method of his time by insisting that theology must begin with God's revelation of himself toward humanity, and not with the human pursuit of the knowledge of God. Bonhoeffer was one of the early adopters of Barth's method, though certainly did not just accept all of the implications or outworkings (as we see in Letters and Papers).
It is important, then, to have a starting point when we talk about a theology of discipleship. I'm going to take Barth and Bonhoeffer's lead as I put forth the conviction that only because God freely chooses to reveal himself to us through Jesus Christ can we live and move in a life of discipleship. We'll have to give it a few weeks (for starters) of research and writing to see how this all comes together.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Kuyper and Bonhoeffer on Faith in Public Life
My research this quarter led me to explore the intersection of the Neo-Calvinist Abraham Kuyper with Bonhoeffer. Here’s the beginning of my paper…
Abraham Kuyper and Dietrich Bonhoeffer are two very different historical and theological figures. Kuyper (1837-1920) was the son of a Dutch Reformed minister and spent his lifetime building and advocating a Calvinistic worldview in the Netherlands. Bonhoeffer (1906-1945) was born into the old Prussian aristocracy and chose the life of a Lutheran pastor, theologian, and resistance fighter against the Nazi regime. Kuyper died after a long and successful career; he founded several institutions, including the Gereformeerde Kerken in Nederland, the Free University, the Anti-Revolutionary Party (the first modern, organized popular political party in the Netherlands), and the daily and weekly newspapers De Standaard and De Heraut, and at the height of his career he was elected the Prime Minister of the Netherlands. Bonhoeffer died at the young age of 39; he was killed in a Nazi concentration camp for his role in the Valkyrie assassination attempt on Hitler. His short life was incredibly productive, though, and some of his theological writings on discipleship, ethics, and the nature of the church have become spiritual classics. Kuyper would have never known of Bonhoeffer, and Bonhoeffer’s interaction with Reformed writings seem to lack any direct connection to Kuyper.[1]
For all their differences, however, Kuyper and Bonhoeffer hold striking similarities, especially in their commitment to Christian engagement with the world. While they employed different methods, emphasized different dogmas, and advocated for different outcomes, Kuyper and Bonhoeffer were really after the same thing. They both were convinced that the nature of the Christian faith demanded clear and direct action in and with the public arena. As a result, they both sought to build a theology that could make sense of and meaningfully engage with the pressing issues in their respective historical circumstances. Kuyper looked to the roots of the Reformed faith in Calvin and worked to construct a theology that was both faithful to its foundations and relevant for the time. Bonhoeffer, too, sought to refine and re-imagine the Lutheran theological tradition in order to articulate a biblical way forward in the midst of Nazi Germany. Their different historical contexts nevertheless led them to a strikingly similar conviction: Christian disciples are called to bear essential witness to the reality of Jesus Christ in the world. Kuyper and Bonhoeffer are thus excellent resources for exploring the very public nature of Christian discipleship.
Personal discipleship demands public engagement because the reality of life in Christ is public, in that it infuses all aspects of life.[2] Kuyper and Bonhoeffer construct theologies of discipleship that speak to the mandate of Christian involvement in and for the world. Their conclusions are both general and specific; they interact with the world from a set of theological convictions and yet allow their unique situation to inform the outworking of that theology. As such, this paper will explore the specific historical context and theological implications of concepts from select writings from Kuyper and Bonhoeffer. Investigations of Kuyper’s writings on sphere sovereignty, common grace, and worldview coupled with Bonhoeffer’s work on church/state authority, Christological ethics, and divine mandates (which culminate in Christonomy) will provide a compelling notion of public discipleship. Kuyper and Bonhoeffer both construct a theology of engagement that operates from and witnesses to the gracious reality of Jesus Christ in the world.
[1] John De Gruchy gives an example of Reformed influence on Bonhoeffer by making the case that Bonhoeffer found himself outside his Lutheran heritage and embracing notions of the Reformed tradition in the decision to participate in the conspiracy against Hitler. Cf. John De Gruchy, Bonhoeffer and South Africa: Theology in Dialogue (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1984), 98ff.
[2] Note that the use of “public” throughout the paper is not limited to “politics,” but rather signifies a theological orientation to all aspects of our interconnected society and life, including occupations, societies, economics, family, etc.
Friday, January 28, 2011
Christonomy
In my research this quarter, I am focusing in on the question of how discipleship takes action in the world. In particular, I am looking at Abraham Kuyper's notions of sphere-sovereignty and common grace and Bonhoeffer's concept of the divine mandates. I'm wondering if the idea of Christopraxis can be a viable synthesis of Kuyper and Bonhoeffer, but need to do some more research before I commit to that conclusion. In the meantime, I've come across a fascinating concept in Bonhoeffer that is new to me, and I imagine will play a key part in my current work.
Bonhoeffer was working on the essay "The Concrete Commandment and the Divine Mandates" for his Ethics when we was arrested on April 5, 1943 - the unfinished manuscript laying open on his desk. In this essay, he explains that the commandment of God revealed in Jesus Christ claims all of human life and the world through the reconciling, all-encompassing love of God. This commandment finds its concrete form in the unity of four mandates: the church, marriage and family, culture, and government.
Bonhoeffer says, "To be sure, the commandment of Jesus Christ rules church, family, culture, and government. But it does so by simultaneously setting each of these mandates free to exercise their respective functions. Jesus Christ's claim to rule as it is proclaimed by the church simultaneously means that family, culture, and government are set free to be what they are in their own nature as grounded in Christ. Only through this liberation, which springs from the proclaimed rule of Christ, can the divine mandates be properly with-one-another, for-one-another, and against-one-another, as we will have to discuss extensively at a later point" (Ethics, 402).
In the midst of this quote, Bonhoeffer inserts a footnote - and this is what really caught my attention: "Here the antagonism between heteronomy and autonomy is overcome and taken up into a higher unity, which we could call Christonomy."
Christonomy - that's a new word to me; but I think I see where he's headed with it. He's describing how the clash of autonomy - where one acts completely on their own will - and heteronomy - where one acts based upon external forces and obligations - is overcome when we understand that only through and in Jesus Christ can one act in complete freedom. This is because true freedom is only when we are with- and for-one-another - and this is only possible in Jesus Christ.
Although Bonhoeffer does not use this term anywhere else in his writings, I think that what he is describing here is really a central theme of his entire theology. And others agree. I found an article by Ulrik Nissen, titled "Disbelief and Christonomy of the World" who argues that indeed Bonhoeffer's adoption of the term "Christonomy" is an accurate and helpful way to understand his theology in general, and Ethics in particular. Nissen is especially helpful in the final section of his article when he describes how Bonhoeffer's ethic of Christonomy can be a useful way to engage issues of contemporary politics.
Considering Kuyper's commitment to Christian engagement in politics, I think there will be quite a bit to work with in a Bonhoeffer-Kuyper dialogue.
On a final note, here's a quote from Nissen that reminds us of Bonhoeffer's commitment to the world: "True worldliness does not exist in an endorsement of the autonomy of the worldly. Any attempt to separate the worldly from the proclamation of Christ leads to a deification of the worldly." Bonhoeffer affirms the world and its mandates (church, family, culture, and government), but only in its reality - the reality of Jesus Christ.
You'll have to give me the rest of the quarter to figure how this all works out...
Bonhoeffer was working on the essay "The Concrete Commandment and the Divine Mandates" for his Ethics when we was arrested on April 5, 1943 - the unfinished manuscript laying open on his desk. In this essay, he explains that the commandment of God revealed in Jesus Christ claims all of human life and the world through the reconciling, all-encompassing love of God. This commandment finds its concrete form in the unity of four mandates: the church, marriage and family, culture, and government.
Bonhoeffer says, "To be sure, the commandment of Jesus Christ rules church, family, culture, and government. But it does so by simultaneously setting each of these mandates free to exercise their respective functions. Jesus Christ's claim to rule as it is proclaimed by the church simultaneously means that family, culture, and government are set free to be what they are in their own nature as grounded in Christ. Only through this liberation, which springs from the proclaimed rule of Christ, can the divine mandates be properly with-one-another, for-one-another, and against-one-another, as we will have to discuss extensively at a later point" (Ethics, 402).
In the midst of this quote, Bonhoeffer inserts a footnote - and this is what really caught my attention: "Here the antagonism between heteronomy and autonomy is overcome and taken up into a higher unity, which we could call Christonomy."
Christonomy - that's a new word to me; but I think I see where he's headed with it. He's describing how the clash of autonomy - where one acts completely on their own will - and heteronomy - where one acts based upon external forces and obligations - is overcome when we understand that only through and in Jesus Christ can one act in complete freedom. This is because true freedom is only when we are with- and for-one-another - and this is only possible in Jesus Christ.
Although Bonhoeffer does not use this term anywhere else in his writings, I think that what he is describing here is really a central theme of his entire theology. And others agree. I found an article by Ulrik Nissen, titled "Disbelief and Christonomy of the World" who argues that indeed Bonhoeffer's adoption of the term "Christonomy" is an accurate and helpful way to understand his theology in general, and Ethics in particular. Nissen is especially helpful in the final section of his article when he describes how Bonhoeffer's ethic of Christonomy can be a useful way to engage issues of contemporary politics.
Considering Kuyper's commitment to Christian engagement in politics, I think there will be quite a bit to work with in a Bonhoeffer-Kuyper dialogue.
On a final note, here's a quote from Nissen that reminds us of Bonhoeffer's commitment to the world: "True worldliness does not exist in an endorsement of the autonomy of the worldly. Any attempt to separate the worldly from the proclamation of Christ leads to a deification of the worldly." Bonhoeffer affirms the world and its mandates (church, family, culture, and government), but only in its reality - the reality of Jesus Christ.
You'll have to give me the rest of the quarter to figure how this all works out...
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Creating a Christian Worldview
My studies this quarter are taking me deep into the characters and ideas that form Neo-Calvinist theology and ethics. One of the main tenets of Neo-Calvinist thought, as put forth by its leader Abraham Kuyper (1837-1920), is the belief that Christianity (as interpreted in Reformed/Calvinist thought) equips people for wide engagement in the whole of society, because all of the world is under God's grace and sovereignty.
There is much to be unpacked in even that one statement, and most of my quarter will be spent trying to understand and articulate the nuances and implications of Kuyper's and his colleague Herman Bavinck's thought. I'm hopeful that I will have some time to work through some of the ideas that I am confronted with here on this blog in the coming months. And I should mention that I am especially looking forward to working with the president of Fuller Seminary, Dr Richard Mouw, in this course. He is my professor and Neo-Calvinism is his specialty - so I'm definitely in for a good ride.
In addition to Neo-Calvinism, I'm going to be turning my attention once again to Bonhoeffer. I'm counting on some of the issues from this seminar to spur further questions and insight into how I might approach Bonhoeffer's thinking on theology and discipleship. As a German Lutheran, Bonhoeffer is definitely not in the same camp as the Dutch Neo-Calvinists Kuyper and Bavinck. But I have a hunch that in many ways they are after the same thing - creating a way to faithfully bear witness to the truth of Jesus Christ in every aspect of life.
It will be interesting to see where my research on Bonhoeffer takes me this quarter. Is there a Neo-Calvinist influence in Bonhoeffer - perhaps that depends on Barth's connection to the movement...? But, whether or not I engage with Neo-Calvinism and Bonhoeffer's thought, I am planning on pursuing Bonhoeffer's formation of a "Christian worldview" in his Ethics. I am also beginning to mine volume 16 of the Bonhoeffer Works collection, Conspiracy and Imprisonment: 1940-1945 in hopes of substantiating the interplay of the concepts of discipleship and ethics in Bonhoeffer. In a very real sense, ethics is discipleship for Bonhoeffer; participating in the conspiracy against Hitler was discipleship for Bonhoeffer. Our theology of discipleship in effect creates our Christian worldview. How Kuyper, Bavinck and Bonhoeffer converse around these issues will be an interesting, and fun, exercise.
Oh, and one last note... I'm currently working through Kuyper's Lectures on Calvinism for discussion in my seminar. Kuyper (who was also prime minister of the Netherlands from 1901-1905) delivered this series of six lectures at Princeton Theological Seminary in October of 1898, in Miller Chapel. This picture was taken in October of 2009, with my wife Jackie, when our daughter Maddie Mae was four months old. Miller Chapel is the white building. Pretty cool.
There is much to be unpacked in even that one statement, and most of my quarter will be spent trying to understand and articulate the nuances and implications of Kuyper's and his colleague Herman Bavinck's thought. I'm hopeful that I will have some time to work through some of the ideas that I am confronted with here on this blog in the coming months. And I should mention that I am especially looking forward to working with the president of Fuller Seminary, Dr Richard Mouw, in this course. He is my professor and Neo-Calvinism is his specialty - so I'm definitely in for a good ride.
In addition to Neo-Calvinism, I'm going to be turning my attention once again to Bonhoeffer. I'm counting on some of the issues from this seminar to spur further questions and insight into how I might approach Bonhoeffer's thinking on theology and discipleship. As a German Lutheran, Bonhoeffer is definitely not in the same camp as the Dutch Neo-Calvinists Kuyper and Bavinck. But I have a hunch that in many ways they are after the same thing - creating a way to faithfully bear witness to the truth of Jesus Christ in every aspect of life.
It will be interesting to see where my research on Bonhoeffer takes me this quarter. Is there a Neo-Calvinist influence in Bonhoeffer - perhaps that depends on Barth's connection to the movement...? But, whether or not I engage with Neo-Calvinism and Bonhoeffer's thought, I am planning on pursuing Bonhoeffer's formation of a "Christian worldview" in his Ethics. I am also beginning to mine volume 16 of the Bonhoeffer Works collection, Conspiracy and Imprisonment: 1940-1945 in hopes of substantiating the interplay of the concepts of discipleship and ethics in Bonhoeffer. In a very real sense, ethics is discipleship for Bonhoeffer; participating in the conspiracy against Hitler was discipleship for Bonhoeffer. Our theology of discipleship in effect creates our Christian worldview. How Kuyper, Bavinck and Bonhoeffer converse around these issues will be an interesting, and fun, exercise.
Oh, and one last note... I'm currently working through Kuyper's Lectures on Calvinism for discussion in my seminar. Kuyper (who was also prime minister of the Netherlands from 1901-1905) delivered this series of six lectures at Princeton Theological Seminary in October of 1898, in Miller Chapel. This picture was taken in October of 2009, with my wife Jackie, when our daughter Maddie Mae was four months old. Miller Chapel is the white building. Pretty cool.
Monday, December 13, 2010
The Possibility of Discipleship
Here's the first two introductory paragraphs to my seminar paper from this quarter...
Dietrich Bonhoeffer's writings from Tegel prison are often describes as "the new theology." His Letters and Papers from Prison contain wonderful and fresh theological insights and represent a serious attempt to reconcile the reality of the revelation of Jesus Christ with the growing effects of secularization on Western religion and culture. Though unfortunately fragmented, the Letters and Papers represent some of Bonhoeffer’s most creative work. They are the result of focused study and reflection on an impressive array of scholarship, including drama, literature, music, history, philosophy and physics. He scoured the prison library for material and he managed to receive a regular supply of books from his family and friends, often smuggled into Tegel by a friendly prison guard. Of the dozens of authors that Bonhoeffer read while in prison, three had a particularly strong influence on the development of his new theology.
Bonhoeffer’s letters from the spring and early summer of 1944 represent the height of his theological reflections. During this time he was giving particular attention to questions of the philosophies of history, human life and worldview and was looking to Wilhelm Dilthey, José Ortega y Gasset and Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker for insight. Dilthey and Ortega y Gasset provided a framework for Bonhoeffer to engage critically the historical emergence of science and its perceived companion secularization. Their philosophies of the radical reality of human life in the interpretation of history offered Bonhoeffer a compelling hermeneutic for interpreting God’s place in the rise of human autonomy. Weizsäcker, a physicist, argued that our evolving scientific view of the world has determined our perception of, and belief in, God; this led to an ever-retreating God of the gaps. From these authors (and certainly others) Bonhoeffer is able to refine and articulate the central aspect of his new theology. He embraces the modern world, calling it “a world come of age,” and declares that Jesus Christ has and always will be in its very midst. The false claims of religion, exposed by secularization, open wide the possibilities of the recognition of God’s nearness and grace. Bonhoeffer understands that the church can only truly follow Jesus Christ when religious constructs are shed from Christianity. He calls this separation religionless Christianity, and it is the very possibility of discipleship in a world that has come of age. This paper argues that Bonhoeffer’s understanding of this “possibility” emerges in part from his study of human life, history and worldview in Dilthey, Ortega y Gasset and Weizsäcker. Each of these three figures will be examined in terms of how their particular writings influenced the development of Bonhoeffer’s emerging theology.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)