DietrichBonhoeffer’ s ChristianHumanism
JENSZIMMERMANN
GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP, UnitedKingdom
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries
©JensZimmermann2019
Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted
FirstEditionpublishedin2019
Impression:1
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2018963079
ISBN978–0–19–883256–0
Printedandboundby CPIGroup(UK)Ltd,Croydon,CR04YY
LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork.
ToSabine,mywife,whoexemplifies “beingforothers.”
Foreword
JensZimmermannhasacquiredawell-deservedreputationasadistinguished scholarforhisworkonculture,ChristianHumanism,andDietrichBonhoeffer’stheology.Takentogetherwithhis IncarnationalHumanism (2012)and Religion&Humanism (2012),thisnewvolumecompletesasplendidtrilogy aroundthesethemes.Assuch,itmakesamajorcontributiontoourunderstandingofthedevelopmentofBonhoeffer’stheologyanditssignificancefor theculturalcrisisofourtime. DietrichBonhoeffer’sChristianHumanism is,in fact,notjustanotherbookaboutBonhoeffer,ofwhichtherearemanyalready available;itisasystematicandfoundationaldiscussionofthedevelopmentof Bonhoeffer’stheologyasessentiallyincarnational,beingdeeplyrooted,asitis, inthePatristictradition.ThisrescuesBonhoeffer’slegacyfromitsshallow appropriationbypopularliberalandconservativepundits,therebymakingit moregenuinelyradicalandrelevant.
ZimmermanngivestwomainreasonsfordescribingBonhoeffer’stheology asaformofChristianhumanism.The firstisthatit “capturesthebasicthrust ofhistheologyandrevealsstrikingparallelswithhumanisticthemesinthe greaterChristiantradition.” Alongwiththepatristictheologiansoftheearly church,Zimmermannsays, “BonhoefferinterpretsthegospelasGod’ spromiseofournew,fullhumanity,apromisethathasbecomearealityinthe IncarnationthroughChrist’srecapitulationofcreation.” Thesecondreason Zimmermanngives,isthatthisunderstandingofBonhoeffer’slegacyis urgentlyneededintheworldtoday,especiallyintheWestwithitschronic and “unprecedenteduncertainty” aboutwhatitmeanstobehuman.Butthere isanequallyimportantreason,whichemergesthroughoutbook,namelythat whenwereadBonhoeffer’stheologywiththeincarnationasits “unifying focus,” thenallthekeycategoriesthattraverseitsdevelopment,fromvicarious representationandsociality,torealisticresponsibilityandChristianityas participationinChrist’snewhumanity,cohere.
DietrichBonhoeffer’sChristianHumanism isthusfarmorethananexplorationofthePatristicrootsofBonhoeffer’stheology.ItisabouttheincarnationalcharacterofBonhoeffer’shermeneuticsinhisendeavortounderstand andproclaimthe “WordofGodhereandnowinthemostconcreteway possible.” Forthatreason,theincarnationalcharacterofBonhoeffer’sbiblical hermeneuticsiscentraltoZimmermann’sproject.Indeed,Bonhoeffer’sgrowing understandingofthebiblicalmessagecorrelateswithhisemergingChristian humanism,forhis “biblicalhermeneuticissubservienttoChristformation,that is,tobecomingtrulyhumanbybecomingChristlike.” Inotherwords,theBible
issacramentalandthereforeanalogoustotheIncarnationin “mediatingdivine presencethroughhumanwords.” AsBonhoeffer’sunderstandingoftheIncarnationdeepens,sohisinterpretationoftheBiblechanges.Notonlydoeshe cometoafreshappreciationoftheOldTestament,butalsotoanawarenessof thepresenceofGodinthetotalityoflife,whichleadshiminturntohisnonreligiousinterpretationofbiblicalconcepts.
Bonhoeffer’sincarnationaltheologyis,then,allabouttheembodimentof God’sunchangingWordwithinourever-changinghistoricalcontexts.Such anapproachtoChristianpraxis,ratherthandividingtheworldintoseparate realms,thesacred,andsecular,unifiesandgroundsallreality,makingthe humanityofChristnormativeforhumanityandChristianactionrealisticand responsible.TheconsequenceisthatBonhoeffer’stheologyprovidesacreative yetcriticalbridgebetweenChristianityandotherhumanistprojects,whether secularorreligious,whichshareacommitmenttoamorejustandpeaceable world,andthereforetotherenewalofamorehumaneculture.
Myhunchisthat DietrichBonhoeffer’sChristianHumanism isgoingtobe widelydiscussedwithinthecirclesofBonhoefferscholarship;myhopeis thatitscoremessagewillhaveamuchwiderimpactamongChristians whoareasconcernedasBonhoefferwasaboutthefutureofhumanity.But whethermyhunchiscorrect,ormyhoperealized,thisisabookforeveryone whoisseriouslyinterestedinunderstandingBonhoeffer’stheologyandits significancetoday.
Hermanus,SouthAfrica viii Foreword
JohnW.deGruchy
Preface
WhyabookonBonhoeffer’sChristianhumanism?Indeed,whyanotherbook onBonhoefferatall?Thesecondquestioniseasytoanswer.AsJeanBethke Elshtainonceobserved,scholarsworkingwithBonhoeffertendtobecome obsessedwithhim,andIhopedthatwritingabookonBonhoeffer’stheology wouldattenuatemyownfascinationwiththistheologianthatbeganaboutten yearsago.Thecontentofthisbook,however,ismeanttoanswerthe first question:IwroteabookonBonhoeffer’sChristianhumanismbecauseno comprehensivetheologicalstudyofthiskindexists,eventhoughprominent Bonhoefferscholars,suchasCliffordGreen,FritzdeLange,¹and,most extensively,JohndeGruchy²havealreadyappliedthelabelChristianhumanismtoBonhoeffer’stheology.
InhisintroductiontoBonhoeffer’ s Ethics, Greensuggeststhat “Bonhoeffer’ s Christology,hisdoctrineofGod’sbecominghumaninJesusChrist,isthe foundationofaChristianhumanism” becausetheIncarnationpromises “both personallyandcorporately” the “restorationoftruehumanity.”³WhileGreen merelyhintsatthehumanisticqualityofBonhoeffer’stheology,deGruchyand deLangehaveshowningreaterdetailtheconfluenceofbiblicalandcultural influencesonhishumanism,whichhadbeennurturedbyaclassical,European education.DeLange,forexample,arguesthatbothBonhoeffer’supbringingand theologyinclinehimtoa “humanismoftheother” thatheidentifieswiththe mosthumaneidealsofWesternculture.ForBonhoeffer,therefore, “onlya theologywhichtakestheincarnationofGodasstartingpointwillbeableto makethetraditionofEuropeanhumanismbearfruit,theinheritanceofa particularEurope,yetuniversalinitsintentions asisChristianfaithitself.”⁴
JohndeGruchy,whoseBonhoefferscholarshipandChristianhumanist outlookhavelargelyinspiredthepresentwork,hasoutlinedtheethicaland politicaldimensionsofBonhoeffer’sChristianhumanism.DeGruchydraws particularattentiontotheecumenical,inclusivecharacterofBonhoeffer’ s
¹ “AParticularEurope,aUniversalFaith:TheChristianHumanismofBonhoeffer’sEthicsin itsContext,” in Bonhoeffer’sEthics:OldEuropeandNewFrontiers (Kampen:KokPharos, 1991), 81–96.
²DeGruchyistheonlyBonhoefferscholarwhooutlinesBonhoeffer’sChristianhumanismin greaterdetail,inpartbecauseheidentifieshisownconsiderableandinterdisciplinary,widerangingtheologicalworkasChristianhumanism.SeeDeGruchy, “DietrichBonhoefferas ChristianHumanist,” in BeingHuman,Becoming Human,ed.JensZimmermannandBrian Gregor(Eugene,OR:WipfandStock,2010),3–24,and ConfessionsofaChristianHumanist (Minneapolis:FortressPress,2006).
³ “Editor’sIntroduction,” in Ethics, DBWE 6,1–44,6.
⁴ DeLange, “AParticularEurope,AUniversalFaith,” 93.
x Preface
thoughtas “ahumanismdeeplyrootedinthesocialityofhumanity,the struggleforpeaceandsolidaritywithsocialvictimsandwithotherhumanists engagedinresistingtyranny,aChristianitythataffirmshopeagainstdespair, andlifeagainstdeath.”⁵ MydetailedanalysisofBonhoeffer’stheology willdelineatethechristologicalstructuresofthisecumenical,life-affirming humanism.Inshort,thisbookwillbeafurtherdevelopmentofandcritical engagementwithexistingscholarshiptoshowmorecomprehensivelythat BonhoefferisintrinsicallyaChristianhumanist.
Mostfundamentally,Iassume,alongwithGreen,deGruchy,anddeLange, thatBonhoefferisaChristianhumanistbecauseofhisincarnationalstarting point.TheconvictionthatGodbecamehumansothathumanbeingscould becometrulyhumanbybeingtransformedintothelikenessofChrist,thetrue imageofGod,istheheartbeatofBonhoeffer’sChristianitythatunifiesand motivateshistheologicalwriting,hispreaching,andhispoliticalconvictions, includinghisoppositiontoHitler.OnaccountofGod’sbecominghuman, ChristianityasparticipationinthenewhumanityestablishedbyChristisall aboutbecomingfullyhumanbybecomingChristlike.Bonhoeffer’sincarnationalstartingpointleadscumulativelytoadecidedlyhumanistictheologyas detailedinthechaptersofthisbook:ananthropologycenteredonhumanity,a theologystructuredhermeneutically,anethicfocusedonChristformation, abiblicalhermeneuticcenteredonGod’stransformingpresence,andatheologicalpoliticsaimedathuman flourishing.
Whatthendothesechapterscontributeconcretelytoextantscholarship onBonhoeffer?Itiswellknown,afterall,thatthesourceofBonhoeffer’ s humanistoutlookistheincarnation.The Leitmotif thatinformsallthemes BonhoeffertakesupisGod’sbecominghumaninChristtorestorehuman beingstotheirfullhumanity.Whetherintheecclesiologyattheheartof hisdoctoraldissertationinwhichhedevelopsasociologyofthechurch (SanctorumCommunio),inthechristologicalontologyhedevelopsinhis habilitationtocorrelatetranscendenceandimmanence(ActandBeing),in thequalityoftheChristianlifeasobedientdiscipleshipintheserviceofothers (Discipleship, LifeTogether),inthetheologicalinterpretationofscripture (CreationandFall, ThePrayerbookoftheBible),orintheholisticvisionfor Christianlifeinasecularsociety(Ethics andthe ‘ new ’ prisontheologyofthe prisonletters) allthesetheologicalexplorations findunityinBonhoeffer’ s unwaveringcommitmenttotheincarnation.Thispervasiveincarnational focusmakesBonhoeffera Christianhumanist. ⁶
⁵“ChristianHumanism:ReclaimingaTradition;AffirminganIdentity, ” in CTIReflections 8 (April19,2009),16.
⁶ ItmaybemoreaccuratetheologicallytospeakaboutBonhoeffer’ s christological humanism, butthistermisslightlyawkwardandhindersanimmediateassociationwiththemorefamiliar termChristianhumanismappliedtopatristicandmedievaltheologianswhoseapproachisno lesschristologicalandbasedontheincarnation.
Whathasnotbeenexaminedinanydetail,however,isexactly how ChristologybothgroundstheChristianlifeasformationintruehumanity andalsoprovidesthe formativestructures thatdefinehumannature,knowing, andlivingwithothersinacommonsecularsphere.Moreover,tomyknowledge,fewhaveattemptedtolocateBonhoefferwithinthegreaterChristian humanisttraditionthatextendsbacktopatristictheology.Inthisbook,Iwish toclosebothofthesegapsbyattemptingtoshowthechristologicalinner workings,asitwere,ofBonhoeffer’sChristianhumanismwithconstant referencetothegreaterChristiantradition.
DeterminingBonhoeffer’srelationtothegreaterChristiantradition,and especiallytopatristicwriters,revealshisrootednessinachristologicalheritage RowanWilliamshasaptlysummarizedin ChristtheHeartofCreation. ⁷ WilliamsdemonstratesthatBonhoefferinheritsandrearticulatesforhis timetheChalcedonianpatristiclegacyoftheincarnationparadigmaticfora participatoryontologyandanon-competitivemodelof finite-infiniterelations thatshapehistheologicaloutlook,hisethics,andalsohislateprisontheology. BecauseforBonhoefferChrist “literallyembodies” the “non-competitive relationofCreatorandcreature,”⁸ sacredandprofaneareneitheridentical noropposed,andChristiandiscipleshipasparticipationinChrist’ snew humanityadoptsthecomportmentofaGodwhohasnoneedtodefend himself,freeingChristiansfromtheobsessionofself-justification.⁹ Williams helpsusseethatBonhoeffer’sincarnationalstartingpoint(ourknowledge aboutwhoGodisstartswiththeincarnation),andhisthis-worldlyChristianity(therefusal “toseetheintegrityofthe finitesomehowdisruptedor diminishedbytheinfinite”)stemfromhisintuitivegraspandcreative rearticulationofpatristicChristology.¹⁰ Williams’sbookappearedaftermy completionofthepresentwork,thuspreventingamoresustainedengagement;asitturnsout,insomeways Bonhoeffer’sChristianHumanism showsin greaterdetailtheeffectsofBonhoeffer’spatristicchristologicalheritage Williamshastracedsoastutelyinhiswork.
Forexample,Williamsalsonotesthecentralrole Stellvertretung (vicarious representation)playsinBonhoeffer’sappropriationofChalcedonianChristologythatestablishesattheheartofreality “thesolidarityofCreatorand creation.”¹¹Wewillshowthefoundationalroleof Stellvertretung forBonhoeffer’ s ChristianhumanismbyhighlightingparallelswithIrenaeus’sconceptof recapitulationtowhichhealludesinhisprisonletters.¹²Bonhoeffer’sentire theologyhingesonhisconvictionthatinChrist allofhumanity,indeedallof creation,wassummedupandrenewed.InbothIrenaeusandBonhoeffer,this recapitulationincludesallofcreation,andChristiansparticipateinthis
⁷ (Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,2018). ⁸ Ibid.,216. ⁹ Ibid.,217.
¹⁰ Ibid.,194.¹¹Ibid.,203.¹² DBWE 8:230.
newrealitywhilestilllivingintheworldthatawaitsChrist’ s finalreturn.¹³ Bonhoeffer’spatristicheritage, filteredthroughLuther,thusincludesthe grand,universalvisonofthe cosmicChrist,mostfullydevelopedinBonhoeffer’ s insistenceonasingle,comprehensiveChrist-Realityin Ethics. This “christocraticcharacterofreality ”¹ ⁴ followsbothPaulineChristianityandthe churchfathersinemphasizingwhatEberhardBethgecalledthe “ ontological coherence ” ofGod ’ srealitywiththerealityoftheworld.¹ ⁵ Faithandreason cooperatebecausealltruthderivesfromandissustainedbythesame eternalWord.
ThemiracleofChristianityistheuncompromisingandnon-competitive expressionofthiseternalWordinthepersonofJesusChrist.ForBonhoeffer, followingthegreatertradition,formationintotruehumanityoccursby participationinthisrealitythroughunionwithChristmadepossibleby theincarnation.Isolatingthecentralnotionof Stellvertretung orvicarious representationallowsustorecognizemorefullythanbeforethetwobasic christologicalstructuresinBonhoeffer’sChristianhumanismresponsiblefor formationintothenewhumanityorChrist-likeness.The firstistheChrist eventitself,comprising “manger,cross,andresurrection”¹⁶ intowhichthe ChristianisdrawnforthesakeofChristformation.Thesecondentails theeschatologicalhorizonofreality,orwhatBonhoeffercallstheultimatepenultimaterelation.
Concerningthe firstchristologicalstructure,itisGod’sbecominghuman inJesustheChrist,hisdeathonthecross,andhisresurrection,withallthree elementsinseparablyheldtogether,thatgiveBonhoeffer’stheologyitsparticular,humanistquality.Thistriadofmanger,cross,andresurrection,by whichChriststoodinforhumanityandrecapitulatedthehumanraceto establishthenewhumanity,determinesBonhoeffer’sviewofreality.On accountoftheincarnation,Godandworldarenotincompetitionand must bethoughttogether.Becauseofthecross,however,thisholismisnotnaïve;for inthecrossthefallenworldisjudged,anddeath,sin,anddehumanizing practicesexposedandcondemned.Andyetagain,theworldisjudgednotwith mercilesscondemnationbutwithaneyetoredemption.Thecrossisjudgment butalsoreconciliationinlightoftheresurrection,whichshowstheworldas preservedforitscompleterenewalintoanewcreationthatalreadydawnsin thechurchasthenewhumanityinembryo.Bonhoefferthusbalancesthe eschatologicaltensionofthe ‘alreadyandnotyet’ witha firmcommitmentto
¹³Thistheologicalstartingpoint(Stellvertretung orrecapitulation)appearsalreadyin Bonhoeffer’ s firstacademicwork SanctorumCommunio,isdeepenedinhisGenesisinterpretation CreationandFall,andparticularlyinhissubsequent ChristologyLectures andthecosmic Christologyofthe Ethics.
¹⁴ Larry,L.Rasmussen, Bonhoeffer:RealityandResistance (Louisville:WestminsterJohn KnoxPress,2005),16.
¹⁵ Qtd.inRasmussen,16.¹⁶ TheGermanphraseis Krippe,Kreuz,undAuferstehung.
thisworldandarealistichopeforthefuture.This,inshort,isthestructureof ‘theone-Christreality,’ inwhichChristiansparticipatebyvirtueoftheirunion withChrist.¹⁷
IninsistingonChristformationasbeingdrawnintotheentireChrist-event, Bonhoefferapproximatesapatristicunderstandingoftheincarnation.Asthe patristicscholarJohnBehrhaspointedout,fortheJohanninegospelandits patristicreception,itisintheentirepassionofChristthatthenewhuman beingisshapedbyGod.Accordingly,wecannotspeakaboutGod’shumanity apartfromChrist’slife,death,andresurrection,forallthreeofthesetaken togetherrevealtousGod’snatureandtruehumanity.Bonhoefferwarns againstthe “perversion” to “absolutize” anyoftheseelementsandthusto invitepathologicaldistortionsofhumanexistence.¹⁸ Stressingonlythe humanityofGodencouragesanuncriticalacceptanceofcreationalordersor dehumanizingculturalpractices.Isolatingthepassionmayleadtoanundue glorificationofsuffering,andfocusingonlyontheresurrectioneasilyleadsto “radicalism,” toanaïve,destructivecounter-culturalwarfareinthenameof religion.¹⁹ Intermsoftheologicalgrammar,itisthereforemisleadingto speakoftheincarnation,death,andresurrection,becausetheterm “incarnation” alreadystandsforthewholeChristevent.Itissurelynoaccident thatBonhoefferrarelyreferstotheincarnationandpreferstheterm Menschwerdung toindicatetheuniqueandcomprehensivenatureofthisChristevent. Wearebecominghuman, “alivinghumanbeing,” bybeingdrawnintothis event.²⁰ ForBonhoeffer,asfortheearlychurch, “thestartingpointfor theologicalreflectionisthepassion,”²¹andbeingdrawnintotheChristeventinitiatesourChristformation.Bonhoeffer’stheology,likeLuther’s,is thereforetrulycruciform,butthistermincludesandneverlosessightof theresurrection.EvenwhendefiningChristianityasparticipatinginGod’ s sufferingwiththeworld,Bonhoefferaffirmshistrustindivineprovidenceand the finalreturnofChrist.²²AccordingtoBonhoeffer,discipleshipindeed meansfollowingChristinthisworld,butwithoutlosingsightoftheeschatologicalaspectofChrist’spassion.Faithisparticipatinginallthreeaspectsof Jesus’sbeing,inhis “havingbecomehuman,death, and resurrection.”²³
¹⁷ DBWE 6:261.JürgenMoltmann’searlyessayonBonhoeffer LordshipofChristandSocial Reality (HerrschaftChristiundsozialeWirklichkeit);HeinrichOtt’ s RealityandFaith (WirklichkeitundGlaube);AndréDumas’ DietrichBonhoeffer:TheologianofReality (Une théologiedelaréalité:DietrichBonhoeffer);RainerMayer’ s ChristReality (Christuswirklichkeit);and,morerecently,BarryHarvey’ s TakingHoldoftheReal eachfullyrecognizethis unifyingconcerninBonhoeffer’swritings.
¹⁸ DBWE6:157.¹⁹ Ibid.
²⁰ See JohntheTheologianandHisPaschalGospel:AProloguetoTheology (Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress,2019),110and255.
²¹Ibid.,251.²² DBWE 8:329,377.²³ DBWE 8:501(myemphasis).
Theeschatologicaltensionwejustdescribedformsthesecond,andrelated, christologicalstructurethatdeterminesBonhoeffer’shumanisticoutlook. In Ethics,Bonhoefferarticulatesthistensionastheultimate-penultimate relation,oneofhisoriginalcontributionstomoderntheology.Theultimatepenultimateschemaallowshimtoembracefullylifeinthisworld,without opposingearthlylovestotheloveofGod,butratheraffirmingwhatever isgoodinearthlylifeastherootedinlovingGod.LovingGodthusbecomes the cantus firmus aroundwhichoneisfreetodevelopthepolyphonyof life’ s “othervoices” withoutconflict.²⁴ Moreover,aswewillsee,byaffirming “thenatural” aslegitimatepenultimatesphere,Bonhoefferbecomesthesole Lutheranvoiceofhistimeattemptingtorecovernatureasthesphereof God’sgrace,therebyespousinganintegralhumanismthatapproximates similareffortsbyfellowCatholicChristianhumanistslikeJacquesMaritain orHenrideLubac.BydiscussingBonhoefferinthecontextofCatholic thoughtonnatureandgrace,includingMaritain’snaturallawtradition, wealsohopetostimulateconversationonthishithertoratherneglected overlap.
WhilemoldedwithintheGerman,twentieth-centurycontextofliberal Protestantismanditschallengebydialectictheology,Bonhoeffer’sthinking transcendsanynarrowconfessionaldivisions.ForalltheLutheranaccentsof histheology,heisaremarkablyecumenicalthinker.Heonceremarkedthat Godwillnotaskusonthedayofjudgment “whetherwehavebeenevangelical butwhetherwedidHiswill.”²⁵ Aswewillshowinthisbook,Bonhoeffer appropriatedfrompatristicandRomanCatholicsourcesthoseinsightshe deemedmostconducivetoChristformation(andthereforetohumanization) andwhichaidedhiscriticalengagementwithnineteenth-centuryProtestantism.Showingthathistheologyproceedsfromaphilanthropicorhumanistic interpretationofthegospelopensupthefullecumenicalpotentialof Bonhoeffer’stheologyandrevealshimasatruly catholic theologian.The parallelsbetweenhisChristianhumanismandthatofthechurchfathers, whichresonatesstillstronglyincontemporaryCatholicism,derivefromhis creativeappropriationofthegreaterChristiantradition.
Wewillinfactencountersignificantparallelsbetweenpatristictheology andBonhoeffer’stheology,akinshiplittleexploredsinceitsrecognitionthirty yearsagobythechurchhistorianReinhartStaats,whorightlypointsto Bonhoeffer’saffinityforandfamiliaritywiththechurchfathers,attributable tohistrainingunderAdolfvonHarnack.²⁶ Characteristically,Bonhoeffer hardlyeveracknowledgesindividualpatristicsourcesinhiscreativeappropriationofthetradition,whereforeadetailedgenealogicalapproachof
²⁴ DBWE 8:394.²⁵ DBW 4:188; DBWE 4:179.
²⁶ ReinhartStaats, “DaspatristischeErbeinderTheologieDietrichBonhoeffers,” 179–80.
mappingsourceinfluenceremainsimpossible.Andyet,ourfocuson Bonhoeffer’sChristianhumanism,thatis,onhisinterpretationofthegospel andtheChristianlifeastheattainmentoftruehumanity,revealstheextentof Bonhoeffer’screativeadaptationofthegreaterChristiantradition,beyondthe usuallyexploredinfluencesofMartinLutherorKarlBarth.
Wewillargue,likelycontroversially,thatonesuchparallelincludespatristic logosChristologywithitsanthropologicalemphasison theosis orChristificationthatenduredevenintothetheologyoftheProtestantreformers,andstill shapesRomanCatholicandEasternOrthodoxtheologiestoday.Aproper understandingofdeification,tousetheLatinterm,revealssignificantresemblanceswithBonhoeffer’scentralnotionofChristformation.Acareful readingofpatristicliteratureonthismatterwillallowustomovebeyond hastyjudgmentsconcerningBonhoeffer’srelationtothegreatertraditionof Christianhumanism.Forexample,CliffordGreenclaimsthatBonhoeffer’ s readingofthegospelasthe “restorationoftruehumanity”“ reverses ” the patristicteachingofdeification.²⁷ Iwillshowinthe firstchaptersofthisbook thatthisclaimismisleadingandrestsonatypicalProtestantmisunderstandingof theosis asblurringthecreature-creatordistinction.Whenweread patristictheologynotasdeparturefrombutfaithfulcontinuation(onthe whole)ofapostolictheology,werecognizethatChristiantheologybegins withthebasichumanistimpulseformulatedbyAthanasiusinhiswork On theIncarnation: “For[theWordofGod]wasincarnatesothatwemightbe madegod.”²⁸ AsIwillillustratewithexamplesfromIrenaeus,theCappadociansandotherpatristicsources,forthefathers, theopoiesis,beingmade divine,doesnoterasetheboundariesbetweenGodandcreature,butrefers totheattainmentofChristlikenessmadepossiblebytheincarnationand enactedthroughparticipationinthebeingofChrist.
ThisparticipatoryontologyalsoexplainsthesimilarsacramentalismcharacteristicofbothpatristicandBonhoeffer’sChristianhumanism.Inoutlining theorientationofhishumanismtowardGod’spresenceinchurchandworld, IaffirmanddeepenrecentstudiesonthesacramentalnatureofBonhoeffer’ s thought.²⁹ AsIshowinanotherchapter,recognizingthesacramentalnatureof histhoughtalsopermitsustoviewBonhoeffer’sbiblicalhermeneuticas integraltohisChristianhumanism.Exegesis,alongwiththesacramentsand liturgicallife,becomesanessentialpartofChristformation,thegrowth intotruehumanitythatdefinesBonhoeffer’stheology.Indeed,Bonhoeffer’ s theologybecomesincreasinglyhumanistictothedegreetowhichheworksout morefullytheimplicationsofwhatthegreatertraditioncallsthe “cosmic
²⁷ DBWE 6:6.
²⁸ OntheIncarnation (NewYork:St.Vladimir’sSeminaryPress,1998),54(167).
²⁹ Seeforexample,TobiasSchulte, OhneGottmitGott:GlaubenshermeneutikmitDietrich Bonhoeffer (Regensburg:Pustet,2013);andNadineHamilton, DietrichBonhoeffersHermeneutik derResponsivität (Göttingen:Vandenhoeck&Ruprecht,2016).
Christ,” i.e.,thePaulineclaimthatallthingswerecreatedforthesakeofChrist andaresustainedbyhim.
GraspingevermorefullytheramificationsofNiceanandChalcedonian theology,ofGodhavingbecomehuman,Bonhoefferworksoutaparticipatory ontologythatallowshimtodiscernsacramentallyhowGodthroughChrist takesforminbelievers,inthechurch,andworld.ThisdeepeningunderstandingofparticipationinChristilluminatesBonhoeffer’smorechallenginglater work,includingtheconceptsof “religionlessChristianity,” and “aworldcome ofage.” Wewillsee,infact,thatevenhispoliticalengagement,including theaffirmationofHitler’sassassination, flowsfromthisparticipationinone Christreality.³⁰
PlacingBonhoefferwithinthegreatertradition,however,alsorequires attentiontohisownparticularGermanandLutheranculturalcontext.Bonhoeffer,forallhisecumenicalspirit,wasformedasatwentieth-century Protestanttheologian,wrestlingwithuniquelymoderntheologicalproblems. Specifically,heoffersprofoundtheologicalcritiques,aidedbyDilthey’ s emphasisonhistoricityandHeidegger’shermeneuticphenomenology,of idealistphilosophy(includingtheCartesiandualismthatfuelsrationalist conceptionsofreality)anditsremnantsinBarth’stheology.Whathasbeen particularlyneglectedinBonhoefferscholarshipuntilnowishowBonhoeffer creativelyrecoverspatristicthemeswiththehelpofmodernthought,thatis, hisinnovativeappropriationofparticipatoryontologyin hermeneutic terms. BecauseGodhasenteredtimeandhistory,fusingthetranscendentandthe immanent,thematerialworldmediatesallhumanknowledgeaboutGod. Bonhoefferheldthathumanknowledgethusfollowsthepatternofthe incarnationinthematerial,historical,andlinguisticmediationoftranscendenttruths.Inrecognizingtheepistemologicalimportoftheincarnation,he advancesafundamentallyhermeneutictheologythattakesaccountofboth human finitudeinknowing,andrevelation’sintrinsicallyinterpretivequality. IndelineatingthehithertoneglectedhermeneuticalstructureofBonhoeffer’ s theology,ouranalysisofhisChristianhumanismfurtherdemonstratesthe contemporaryrelevanceofhisthought.
Weconcludewithafewwordsonthecomprehensivenatureofthis book.ThebestBonhoefferinterpretershaveinsistedthat “conductingan adequateinterpretationofBonhoeffer’stheologyispossibleonlywithinthe frameworkofinterpretinghisworkasawhole.”³¹Thisbookfollowsthis admonitionbykeepingtheentirecorpusofBonhoeffer’sworkinview. Bonhoefferscholarshavetriedtocapturetheoverallthrustofhistheology
³⁰ LarryRasmussen, DietrichBonhoeffer:RealityandResistance,124–6. ³¹RainerMayer, Christuswirklichkeit.Grundlagen,EntwicklungUndKonsequenzenDer TheologieDietrichBonhoeffers. ArbeitenZurTheologie,Reihe2.(Stuttgart:Calwer,1969),16.
bycallingita “theologyofsociality,”³² “atheologyofreality,”³³and “atheology oflife.”³⁴ WhiletheselabelsdocapturekeyaspectsofBonhoeffer’stheology, theunderlyingassumptionofthisbookisthatChristianhumanismmorefully capturestheoverallqualityandimpetusofBonhoeffer’sachievement. WithoutwantingtomountanargumentfortheunityofBonhoeffer’ s writings,aunifying,retrospectiveinterpretivelensturnsouttobeonesignificantbyproductofdescribinghistheologyashumanism.ReadingBonhoeffer’ s theologyasaChristianhumanism,unifiedbyanincarnationalfocus,allowsus toreadbackwardsfromhismorematuretheologyin Ethics tohistheological beginnings.BasicBonhoefferiancategories,suchasvicariousrepresentation, sociality,realisticresponsibility,andChristianityasparticipationinChrist’ s newhumanityareestablishedearlyonandcontinuethroughouthiswork, fromhis firstdissertationtohisprisonletters.Whenreadholisticallyas incarnationalhumanism,hismajorwritingsseemtoorderthemselvesinto fourphases.Inthe firstphase,Bonhoeffer’sdissertation,habilitation,and hisinaugurallectureonthehumanquestion³⁵ formanaturalunityin whichtheologicalanthropology,overagainstphilosophicalidealism,constitutesadominatinginterest.Followingthepersonalisttendenciesofhis day representedbythinkerssuchasMartinBuber,SørenKierkegaard, FriedrichGogarten,andothers Bonhoefferarticulatesaconcretelyhistorical, ethical,responsibleChristianself,whoseequiprimordialindividualityand socialitypersistinto Ethics andtheprisontheology.Authenticselfhoodand self-knowledgebecomepossibleonlywithinthechurchwhosenatureis “Christexistingascommunity,” anincarnationalconceptionofthe sanctorum communio thatcontinuestoremainessentialforallofBonhoeffer’stheology. Bonhoeffer’swinterterm1932/33course(eventuallypublishedas Creation andFall)andthesubsequentChristologylecturesinthesummerterm1933 markadistinctshiftinhisoutlook.Bonhoefferhimselfcitesapersonalturn “fromthephraseologicaltothereal,” indicatingamovefromatheoretical modeoftheologizingtooneofexistentialseriousness.EberhardBethge interpretsthistimeofBonhoeffer’slifeas “theturnfromtheologiantothe Christian,” aslightlymisleadingwayofputtingthesameidea.³⁶ Bonhoeffer didnot,ofcourse,forgotheology,nordidthetheologicalconceptionshe developeddisappearfromhiswritings.Hedid,however,becomebothmore
³²CliffordJ.Green, Bonhoeffer:ATheologyofSociality,Rev.ed.(GrandRapids,MI:Wm. B.EerdmansPublishingCo.,1999).
³³HeinrichOtt, RealityandFaith:TheTheologicalLegacyofDietrichBonhoeffer. 1st Americaned.(Philadelphia:FortressPress,1972).
³⁴ RalfK.Wüstenberg, ATheologyofLife:DietrichBonhoeffer’sReligionlessChristianity (GrandRapids,MI:Wm.B.EerdmansPublishingCo.,1998).
³⁵ DBWE 10:389.
³⁶ EberhardBethge, DietrichBonhoeffer: ABiography,trans.EricMosbacher(Minneapolis: Fortress,2004),202ff.
ecclesialandseriousinthepracticeofChristianity:headoptedameditative readingofthescriptures,talkedabouttheexistentialrealityofconfession, andleanedtowardspacifism.Undoubtedly,Bonhoeffer’ssojournatUnion TheologicalSeminaryandhiscontactwithAfrican-Americanspirituality contributedsignificantlytothischange.³⁷ Intheearly1930s,Christand ChristianitybecameadeeplyexistentialrealityforBonhoeffer,asindicated byhisownconfessionthataroundthistime “Icameforthe firsttimetothe Bible. ...Ihad alreadyoftenpreached,Ihadseenmuchofthechurch,talked andwrittenaboutit andIhadnotyetbecomeaChristian.”³⁸
Bonhoeffer’stheologyduringtheseyearsdisplaysanewintensityand rhetoricalqualitythatdefieseasycharacterization.Eveninhisearlieracademic pieces,Bonhoefferadoptsanassertivevoicethatdoesnothidebehindacademicreferencestootherthinkers.Yetatthistime,Bonhoeffer’stonebecomes moredeclaratory,asifindeedeachofhisnewworksfromthispointonward attemptstoanswerthequestionthatdeterminesBonhoeffer’sentiretheology, namely “whoisChristforustoday?” Theself-reflexive,confessionalstyleof hislecturesonGenesisindicatesthisnewurgency,demonstratinghispassion forthechurchandforthehumanneedtobeaddressedbyGodinChrist. Thisecclesial,existentialChristiantheologizingconditionstheremainderof Bonhoeffer’stheology.
Thethirdphaseoccursfollowing Discipleship.His Ethics continuesto outlineobedientlivinginChristaspartofChrist’sbody,oras “Christexisting incommunity.” Herehistheologyentersanevenmoreself-reflectiveand hermeneuticalmode.TheinfluenceofCatholictheologyandtheanticipation ofarticulatingChristianityforapost-wareragive Ethics adifferentoutlook from Discipleship,evenwhileaddressingthesamequestion, “whoisChristfor ustoday?” Bonhoeffer’suniqueattemptin Ethics torecoverforProtestantism asenseofthe “natural” confirmshisgrowingsensethatGod’spresenceisalso experiencedwithincreation,providingnaturalhumanrights,andanatural platformforpublicethicalreasoning.
Finally,theprisontheology,withtheprovocativeideasofreligionless Christianity,non-religiousinterpretationofbiblicalconcepts,andunconsciousChristianityexploresfurthertheimplicationsoftheincarnationfora worldbecomingdisenchantedwithitsparticularWesternChristianinheritance.Inthisfourthphase,thequestionbecomeshowGodisLordover,andat thesametimepresentin, this “mature” world,andhowChristiansparticipate inChrist’sreconciliationofittoGod.DisenchantedwiththeLutheranchurch anditsfailuretoresisttheNaziregime,Bonhoefferenvisionsadisestablished
³⁷ SeeReggieWilliams, Bonhoeffer’sBlackJesus:HarlemRenaissanceTheologyandanEthicof Resistance (Waco,Texas:BaylorUniversityPress,2014).
³⁸ EberhardBethge, DietrichBonhoeffer: Theologe-Christ-Zeitgenosse.EineBiographie. Rev. ed.(Gütersloh:GütersloherVerlagshaus,2004),249.
churchthathastoearnitscredibilitybyprayerandrighteousliving.Yet,asin alltheotherphasesofhistheologicaldevelopment,Bonhoeffercontemplates withthesedevelopmentstheimplicationsoffollowingaGodwhobecame humaninvicariousrepresentativeaction.
Insum,frombeginningtoend,albeitinevermorenuancedandfullerdimensions,Bonhoeffer’stheologyrepresentsaChristian(christological)humanism. That,atleast,istheargumentadvancedinthisbook,backedupbyreadingsof Bonhoeffer’stexts,sermons,andlettersfromhisearlyacademicworkstohislast lettersfromprison.WhatthendoesonegainfromreadingBonhoefferasa Christianhumanist?Forone,thereaderwillgainacomprehensivesenseofwhat Bonhoeffer’stheologyisabout(becomingtrulyhumanthroughparticipationin Christ).Moreover,readingBonhoefferasChristianhumanistallowsustoview Bonhoeffer’swholetheologyinlightofthegreaterChristiantradition,fromthe churchfathersonwards,thusthrowingintoreliefthecatholic,ecumenicalappeal ofhistheology.IamcertainfrommanyconversationswithEasternOrthodox andRomanCatholicfriendsthatthisreadingofBonhoeffer’santhropologyand participatoryontologywillresonatewiththeirtraditions.Finally,readingBonhoefferasChristianhumanistmayalsoprovideyetanotheraidforovercoming residualdualisticmisrepresentationsofGod’srelationtotheworld.Bonhoeffer’ s humanistinterpretationofthegospelasGod’ s philanthropy recallstheearly church’ssocialengagementandconcernforhuman flourishingbasedonGod’ s becominghuman.Thisrecovery,inturn,isimportantforourassessmentof Christianity’srolewithinmodern,pluralisticsocieties.
