Bonhoeffer

I’m trying to puzzle out the meaning of the following paragraph from Bonhoeffer’s Discipleship (DBWE 4). Fundamentally eliminating simple obedience introduces a principle of scripture foreign to the Gospel.[19] According to it, in order to understand scripture, one first must have a key to interpreting it. But that key would not be the living Christ himself in judgment and grace, and using the key would not be according to the will of the living Holy Spirit alone. Rather, the key to scripture would be a general doctrine of grace, and we ourselves would decide its use. The problem of following Christ shows itself here to be a hermeneutical problem. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Discipleship, ed. Martin Kuske et al., trans. Barbara Green and Reinhard Krauss, vol. 4, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003), 82. ...

The following is from Bonhoeffer’s Discipleship (usually known as “The Cost of Discipleship” in English, although the original title in German was simply Nachfolge). Bonhoeffer considers how we might respond to Jesus if Jesus were to show up and make the same kinds of concrete commands that he did in the Gospels. NOTE: I’ve taken two paragraphs in the original and broken them up into smaller chunks to facilitate reading here. ...

This summer, I’ve spent most of my reading/writing time working on a paper on Barth’s Römerbrief reading of Romans 10. This paper is for the 2019 Barth Graduate Student Colloquium, and it has taken way longer than I originally anticipated. Will I get to use this paper in my dissertation? I’m not sure. At first, I got excited, because, in my work on Genesis 1–3 last school year, I discovered some differences in how Barth and Bonhoeffer handled Genesis 1–3 vis-a-vis the subsequent history of Israel. Namely, while Barth takes care to work his way from Eden to the Church only after moving through the history of Israel and Jesus, Bonhoeffer jumps right from Eden to the Church via Christ. This difference in what I’m provisionally calling “Christological immediacy”—which is perhaps a confessional one that parallels some of the exegetical differences between Calvin and Luther—has me wondering whether Barth and Bonhoeffer differed in important ways on Israel. ...

John Webster’s Idea Like so many others, I desperately wish that John Webster were still alive. After all, my dissertation topic owes much to his essay: “Reading the Bible: The Example of Barth and Bonhoeffer.” The essay (previously published as ‘“In the Shadow of Biblical Work:” Barth and Bonhoeffer on Reading the Bible,’and then published in Word and Church: Essays in Christian Dogmatics (paid link)) begins: Two things at least are clear about the relationship of Barth and Bonhoeffer: that disentangling the history of their relation is of considerable importance for making sense of Bonhoeffer, if not of Barth; and that the disentangling is a rather delicate operation which involves some discriminating interpretation of the writings of two complex theologians. Much, for example, hangs on what we are to make of Bonhoeffer’s scattered remarks on Barth, revelation and non-religious interpretation in the prison writings, and of Barth’s puzzled response to them (87). ...

I got my dissertation proposal approved in the Spring of 2018. Working title: “Scriptural but Not Religious: Karl Barth, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and a Biblical Critique of Religion.” Barth + Bonhoeffer + Bible + Religion. “Barth, Bonhoeffer, and Bible” is the gap/niche. But that would be too much to tackle comprehensively in a dissertation. So “religion” is designed to be the delimiter—specifically, Barth’s and Bonhoeffer’s theological critiques of religion. Dissertation-wise, I didn’t make as much progress as I would’ve liked to during the 2018–19 school year. However, I became a father and I passed all my courses. So I’m counting that as a win. ...

SOURCE: Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Indexes and Supplementary Materials, ed. Victoria J. Barnett et al., vol. 17, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2014), 154–158. Sermons and Meditations Address on Jeremiah 27–28—(DBWE vol. )9 Address on John 19—9 Address on Luke 12:35ff.—9 Address on Matthew 21:28–31—9 Address on the Decalogue—9 Address on the First Commandment—9 Baptismal Homily on Joshua 24:15—13 Baptism Sermon on 1 John 4:16—11 Baptism Sermon on Ephesians 5:14—11 Bible Reading and Prayer on 1 Corinthians 4:20—13 Biblical Reflection: Morning—14 Catechesis in the Second Theological Examination on the Fifth Petition of the Lord’s Prayer—10 Catechetical Examination on Matthew 8:5–13—9 Catechetical Outline concerning the Second Article of Faith—9 Children’s Address on Psalm 24:7–9 Communion Homily on 1 Corinthians 15:55—15 Confession Homily on Micah 4:9—15 Confirmation—15 Confirmation Question Confirmation Sermon on Mark 9:24 Confirmation Verses Devotional Aids for the Moravian Daily Texts—16 Daily Text Meditation for June 7 and 8, 1944 Daily Text Meditation for Pentecost 1944 Devotions on John 8:31–32—11 Devotions on Luke 4:3–4—11 Devotions on Luke 4:5–8—11 Draft for a Catechism: As You Believe, So You Receive—11 Draft for a Liturgy, Remembrance Sunday—10 Draft for a Liturgy, Reminiscere (Memorial Day)—10 Opening Liturgy Prayer Draft for Worship Service on 2 Corinthians 2:14; 6:10; 6:1—15 Exegesis and Catechetical Lesson on Luke 9:57–62—9 Exegesis and Sermon on James 1:21–25—9 Exposition on Romans 9–11 (Student Notes)—14 Exposition on the First Table of the Ten Words of God—16 Fragment of a Wedding Sermon—13 Funeral Address on Luke 2:29–30—13 Funeral Liturgy and Homily on Proverbs 23:26 for Hans-Friedrich von Kleist-Retzow—16 Guide to Scriptural Meditation—14 Homily for the Children’s Service—10 Homily on Daniel 10:1, 8, 16–19—12 Liturgy for a Seminar Worship Service—12 Liturgy Fragment for Christmas—15 Marriage Sermon on Ruth 1:16–17—13 Meditation and Catechetical Lesson on “Honor”—9 Meditation and Sermon on Luke 9:51–56 for the Theological Examination—9 Meditation on Luke 9:57–62—13 Meditation on Psalm 119—15 Bonhoeffer’s Meditation (Fragment) Two Structural Outlines of Psalm 119 Notes for a Young Man—10 Outline for a Homily for Personal Confession on Proverbs 28:13–14 Outline on Proverbs 3:27–33—14 Recommended Devotions on Jeremiah 16:21 and Ephesians 1:22–23—16 Sermon for Evening Worship Service on 2 Corinthians 12:9—13 Sermon for Evening Worship Service on Proverbs 16:9–13 Sermon for the Lector on Matthew 2:13–23—15 Sermon for the Second Theological Examination on 1 Thessalonians 5:16–18—10 Sermon (Fragment) on Deuteronomy 32:48–52—10 Sermon (Fragment) on Luke 12:49—10 Sermon (Fragment) on Matthew 7:1—10 Sermon (Fragment) on Song of Solomon 8:6b—10 Sermon Meditation on Isaiah 9:6–7—16 Sermon Meditation on Revelation 2:1–7—14 Sermon Meditations—15 Sermon Meditation on John 3:16–21 for the Second Day of Pentecost Sermon Meditation on John 10:11–16 for Misericordias Domini Sunday Sermon Meditation on John 14:23–31 for the First Day of Pentecost Sermon Meditations on John 20:19–31 for Quasimodogeniti Sunday Sermon on 1 Corinthians 2:7–10—13 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 12:27, 26—10 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 13:1–3—13 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 13:4–7—13 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 13:8–12—13 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 13:13—13 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 15:17—10 Pulpit Notes Sermon Sermon on 1 John 2:17—10 Sermon on 1 John 4:16—10, 11 Sermon on 1 Peter 1:7b–9—12 Sermon on 2 Chronicles 20:12—11 Sermon on 2 Corinthians 5:10—13 Sermon on 2 Corinthians 5:20—13 Sermon on 2 Corinthians 12:9—10 Sermon on Colossians 3:1–4—11 Sermon on Genesis 32:25–32; 33:10—11 Sermon on Exodus 32:1–8, 15–16, 18–20, 30–35—12 Sermon on Jeremiah 20:7—13 Sermon on John 8:32—11 Sermon on Judges 6:15–16; 7:2; 8:23—12 Sermon on Luke 1:39–56—14 Sermon on Luke 1:46–55 Sermon on Luke 12:35–40—11 Sermon on Luke 13:1–5—13 Sermon on Luke 16:19–31—11 Sermon on Luke 17:7–10—9 Sermon on Luke 17:33—10 Sermon on Luke 21:28—13 Sermon on Mark 9:23–24—13 Sermon on Matthew 5:8—10 Sermon on Matthew 8:23–27—12 Sermon on Matthew 11:28–30—13 Sermon on Matthew 16:13–18—12 Sermon on Matthew 18:21–35—14 Sermon on Matthew 24:6–14—11 Sermon on Matthew 26:45b–50—14 Sermon on Matthew 28:20—10 Sermon on Philippians 4:7—10 Sermon on Psalm 42—14 Sermon on Psalm 58—14 Sermon on Psalm 62:2—10 Sermon on Psalm 63:3—11 Sermon on Psalm 90—14 Sermon on Psalm 98:1—13 Sermon on Psalm 127:1—9 Sermon on Revelation 2:4–5, 7—12 Sermon on Revelation 3:20—10 Sermon on Revelation 14:6–13—14 Sermon on Romans 5:1–5—15 Sermon on Romans 11:6—10 Sermon on Romans 12:11c—10 Sermon on Romans 12:17–21—15 Sermon on Wisdom 3:3—13 Sermon on Zechariah 3:1–5—14 Supplements to the Monthly Letters from the Confessing Church Council of Brethren in Pomerania to Its Pastors—15 Meditation on Christmas Meditation on Epiphany Theological Reflection on the Lord’s Supper Wedding Sermon from the Prison Cell—8 Wedding Sermon on 1 Thessalonians 5:16–18—14 Wedding Sermon on John 13:34—14

(Here’s a PDF of this paper: STEELE_The Tree of Religion Barth and Bonhoeffer on the Tree of Knowledge.) Introduction The precise meaning of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (=TK) has long vexed interpreters of Genesis 2:4–3:24.1 While the “tree of life” (=TL) is mentioned and alluded to throughout the Bible, the TK is explicitly mentioned by its full name just twice (Gen. 2:9, 17).2 Nevertheless, because of the significant role that the TK plays in the narrative, both Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Karl Barth highlight the TK in their theological interpretations of Genesis 1–3. Furthermore, both theologians describe the TK and the knowledge of good and evil (=KGE) in ways that resemble their theological critiques of “religion” as an improper response to divine revelation. ...

God consents to be pushed out of the world and onto the cross; God is weak and powerless in the world and in precisely this way, and only so, is at our side and helps us. Matt. 8:17 makes it quite clear that Christ helps us not by virtue of his omnipotence but rather by virtue of his weakness and suffering! This is the crucial distinction between Christianity and all religions. Human religiosity directs people in need to the power of God in the world, God as deus ex machina. The Bible directs people toward the powerlessness and the suffering of God; only the suffering God can help. ...

John Webster’s essay, “Reading the Bible: The Example of Barth and Bonhoeffer” (pages 87–110 in Word and Church: Essays in Christian Dogmatics (paid link) [Edinburgh; New York: T&T Clark, 2001]) is, in large part, the inspiration for my doctoral dissertation. I’d like to share the three reflections/lessons Webster draws from the biblical work of Barth and Bonhoeffer. Wrapping up his essay, Webster claims that Neither Bonhoeffer nor Barth were wissenschaftlich theologians; both were practical or pastoral theologians of the church of Jesus Christ. . . . Both, in short, were members of the guild, so despised by Kant and most of his heirs, of biblical theologians. Pondering their work may give us cause to reflect on three matters (108–109). ...

There’s an intriguing passage in Bonhoeffer’s Letters and Papers from Prison where he discusses the relationship between “spirit” and “flesh,” in the context of discussing “restoration” and “sublimation,” in the context of discussing lyrics from certain hymns and songs that were meaningful to him in prison. Here it is, from a December 19, 1943 (the Fourth Sunday of Advent) letter to Eberhard Bethge: In recent weeks this line has been running through my head over and over: “Calm your hearts, dear friends; / whatever plagues you, / whatever fails you, / I will restore it all.” What does that mean, “I will restore it all”? Nothing is lost; in Christ all things are taken up, preserved, albeit in transfigured form, transparent, clear, liberated from the torment of self-serving demands. Christ brings all this back, indeed, as God intended, without being distorted by sin. The doctrine originating in Eph. 1:10 of the restoration of all things, ἀνακεφαλαίωσις—re-capitulatio (Irenaeus), is a magnificent and consummately consoling thought. (DBWE 8:229–30) ...

In The Epistle to the Romans, Barth writes the following concerning the false image of God at the heart of religion: What men on this side resurrection name ‘God’ is most characteristically not God. Their ‘God’ does not redeem his creation, but allows free course to the unrighteousness of men; does not declare himself to be God, but is the complete affirmation of the course of the world and of men as it is. This is intolerable, for, in spite of the highest honours we offer him for his adornment, he is, in fact, ‘No-God’. The cry of revolt against such a god is nearer the truth than is the sophistry with which men attempt to justify him (Romans, 40). ...

(Note: Read more about my work on Barth, Bonhoeffer, and the Bible here.) I’m really looking forward to reading these two Barth (and Bonhoeffer) books coming out from Baker in 2019: Freedom under the Word: Karl Barth’s Theological Exegesis (paid link). Edited by Ben Rhodes and Martin Westerholm. Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Theologians for a Post-Christian World (paid link). By Wolf Krötke. Translated by John P. Burgess. Freedom under the Word (May 2019) According to Baker: ...

Based upon my own reading of Bonhoeffer’s Letters and Papers from Prison [DBWE 8] (paid link), here is my attempt at a summary list of the facets/aspects of Bonhoeffer’s view of “religion” in prison. Religion emphasizes inwardness. [DBWE 8:362, 364, 455–57] Religion emphasizes conscience. [DBWE 8:362] Religion is a temporary phenomenon. [DBWE 8:362, 364] Religion is manipulative and exploitative. [DBWE 8:363, 366, 426–27, 450, 455–57] Religion ignores human strength/knowledge/autonomy and instead focuses on human weakness, ignorance, and boundaries/limits/limitations. [DBWE 8:366, 405–7, 426–27, 450, 455–57, 475–78] Religion is metaphysical, otherworldly, and escapist. [DBWE 8:364, 372–73, 447–48, 480, 485–86, 501] Religion is privileged. [DBWE 8:364] Religion is, like circumcision, no longer a condition for salvation. [DBWE 8:365–66] Religion posits a false “God” (a “deus ex machina,” “working hypothesis,” and “stopgap”) on the other side of human boundaries (a shrinking area, as humanity matures) in order to solve human problems. [DBWE 8:366, 405–7, 426–27, 450, 455–57, 475–80, 500–1] Religion is driven by anxiety. [DBWE 8:366, 478] Religion is individualistic. [DBWE 8:372–73] Religious language has lost its power.[DBWE 8:390] Religion is a particular posture towards life, capable of being exemplified, not only by pastors, but also by existential philosophers and psychotherapists. [DBWE 8:427, 450, 457] Religion is a partial and segmented posture towards life. [DBWE 8:455–57, 482] Religion ignores the world’s increasing godlessness. [DBWE 8:480, 482]

As I slowly make progress on my dissertation (“Scriptural but Not Religious: Karl Barth, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and a Biblical Critique of Religion”), I’m longing for the day when: Karl Barth’s Gesamtausgabe (Collected Edition) is finished. They are translated into a critical English edition. They are available within the same database/framework as Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Works in English and German (DBWE and DBW). In the meantime, the Digital Karl Barth Library, provided by Alexander Street Press is the best resource out there for searching the text of Barth’s works. ...

Tomorrow, I defend the proposal for my dissertation. For now, the dissertation is tentatively titled: “Scriptural, but Not Religious: Karl Barth, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and a Biblical Critique of Religion.” Here’s the “elevator pitch” for the dissertation. Feedback appreciated. Scriptural, but Not Religious: Barth, Bonhoeffer, and a Biblical Critique of Religion My project traces its origins to a single classroom discussion question in the Spring of 2015. The question was this: “In what ways is Bonhoeffer’s understanding of religion similar to, and different from, that of Barth?” ...