pgs. 45-97 of Dietrich Bonhoeffer: A Biography, Revised Edition, by Eberhard Bethge, Fortress (2000).
I found parts of this chapter more difficult than the first to get through. Where the first chapter had many references to dates and people which are (to me) now inaccessible in history, these were at least names and places. The descriptions were sufficient to place me in some kind of proximity. While Bonhoeffer's journey with his brother to Rome were very important I'm not going to deal with them here. My impression of his journals and letters to home on this trip are that his initial introduction to the church were largely ascetic, but who can say that for sure? Bethge points out that Bonhoeffer was drawn to Rome's art and liturgy and that this was unusual given his upbringing. If someone has questions I'll go back and pay more attention here.
With this second chapter I entered the very esoteric and daunting world of Berlin University. The professors names and writings are far removed from my access at this time. Seeburg, Althaus, Harnack. The new theological world appearing with Karl Barth is only beginning to appear. Dietrich is only nineteen and yet he writes his dissertation, Sanctorum Communio, in eighteen months. Eberhard Bethge writes:
"[He] found himself dealing with too many issues when he tried to reconcile completely divergent disciplines like historicism and sociology on the one hand, and the theology of revelation on the other."(pg. 82)
My attempts at reading Sanctorum Communio are disastrous. I've never read any Hegel or Seeburg, Althaus or Harnack. I'm lost with just the simple reference to pro me or extra me. I think I'm not alone. When this work was published it was ignored. Bethge says that only in 1955 with the appearance of Letters and Papers from Prison and the interest in "worldly Christianity" was there any interest in this work. The highest praise came from Karl Barth in his Church Dogmatics,
"I openly confess that I have misgivings whether I can even maintain the high level reached by Bonhoeffer, saying no less in my own words and context, and saying it no less forcefully, than did this young man so many years ago."
I know where to read next. I have Clifford Green's, Bonhoeffer: A Theology of Sociality. This work allows me to read all of Dietrich's works in context and progression from SC to Ethics. That doesn't make it easy.
Part of my personal problem with SC is Dietrich's decision to enter a pastorate rather than become a professor. I feel like this practical decision made his SC sheer conjecture in many ways. Why read it if Bonhoeffer grew beyond it? And yet in our growth as people we are always the sum of our learning and experiences. Are these feelings just clouding reality? I'm trying to ignore these and continue my reading work. It is hard work because I'm creating these reference points as I go along. I'm not prodded by anyone to continue at this time. I'm self-educated and that has definite limitations. Even so there is something in Bonhoeffer that is very fresh and relevant for today. Many schools are now recognizing this. I've been reading Dietrich personally for like fifteen years now on and off. I got into Karl Barth because of Bonhoeffer. But I just keep reading Life Together and Discipleship, selections from the reader A Testament to Freedom, and lots of books about him. If I'm really going to study him seriously I've got to start from the beginning and plunge into Sanctorum Communio and Act and Being and then finally Christology. I know God is using all this to form me. I don't know why. The hard work is for something.
Back to the book. In addition to the dissertation he turned in seven essays and nine drafts for catechisms and sermons and invested himself in a local church, principally in designing lessons for children. I am so delighted to read of Dietrich's fascination with children! What a paradox! Writing Sanctorum Communio and then painstakingly designing stories for children.
Bethge writes:
"Bonhoeffer preached to the children in his group as much as possible. He made biblical stories as exciting as sagas or as appealing as fairy tales. He went to great trouble to hold the children's attention, which is why he so carefully wrote out in advance what he proposed to tell them. He told them tales such as that about the king in his castle who sent out heralds who never returned; about the devil who stole a pot of red paint and painted the humble mushroom, bestowing upon it the poison of pride; about the old woman caught in a snowstorm outside a locked door (an Advent story); and he gave a dramatic account of the struggle for the people's confidence between the prophets Jeremiah and Hananiah. He had no qualms about taking liberties with the text.Even as he writes this hopelessly abstract and esoteric dissertation, Dietrich the barely adult man is spending himself on behalf of little kids. Is it too much to speculate that his work with the children affected SC? At this time in his learning he would sometimes just spit back what he was reading. But with this work he seems passionate understand all the social and historical ramifications of being the church and knowing Christ in it. At any rate, teaching these children while working on the dissertation illustrates that Bonhoeffer's interest in theology was always practical as well as academic.
He discovered that when children expect something it is impossible to give only part of oneself to them. He also became aware of the role of psychological and personal factors, and appreciated the risk these could pose to the real purpose of religious instruction. He was disturbed when children began to flock to his group, and became so worried about developing personal ties that he wrote for advice to Richard Widmann, who now led a parish in Wurttemberg." (pg. 92)
Fighting my way through this chapter was rewarding.
Tags:
No comments:
Post a Comment