Upon arrival in Anderson some three hours ago, I was greeted by a text message from my friend Emily that read:
I had to laugh.
It wasn't just that I was amused by Emily, but I was more amused by the fact that... I'm "friends" with a dead-white-male-theologian.
Yes, I'm giving you permission to judge me for my dead-man crush on Dietrich Bonhoeffer, German pastor and theologian (and son, brother, friend, martyr... the list goes on). After all, I was the one who, just before I started my SOT application, told the guy who eventually became my theology professor that I was no theologian, nor was I interested in ever becoming one. I will have to applaud Greg Robertson and Arthur Kelly for their graciousness in not calling me out on how little I knew about theology to even decide that I wasn't a theologian.
So yes, I just spent the last two days at a conference where the theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer was discoursed. And yes, my brain is exhausted from trying so hard to tear apart words like pneumatology, christo-ecclesialogy, and entering into conversations with folks like Foucault, Lacoste and Heidegger. But it's also wide awake with all these new pieces of Bonhoefferian theology that I hadn't thought about before.
Now we all know that as much as possible, I avoid blogging academia because God only knows how little I know about academia and how hard I try not to bore people with it. So if this entry gets a little weird and boring, I apologise in advance.
See, here's the thing. Aside from Luther, the next closest theologian that I would "categorise" Bonhoeffer with is Henri Nouwen. Granted I haven't had much direct interaction with either of those, but the God-Self-Community interactions that Bonhoeffer and Nouwen bring to the theological table draw similar parallels to my own theology of the Trinity. This was something that I pieced together tentatively in a paper for Strege's Constructive Theology I, way back in the day, but something I still stand by. I'm excited enough about this whole thing to want to get into this now, but I also need to be at work in a few hours and sleep is kind of a necessary part of life, so ask me about this another time.
But the slight differential I see between Bonhoeffer and Nouwen is that Bonhoeffer's attempt to live out his theology of God-Self-Community (I'm choosing the word community here rather than the word "other" because community is more inclusive) is more blatant. Nouwen's theology seem more... "Cognitive" (A word I learnt from Jacob Coppess, a friend I'm coming to appreciate more and more, this weekend) whereas Bonhoeffer's writings seem to be more of an interaction between the struggles of his personal experience and the decisions he has to make.
There were moments at this conference where I found myself thinking, I wonder what Bonhoeffer would think if he were present. I'd like to think he wouldn't so much be offended by the possible misinterpretations of his writing, as much as I wonder what he would have thought about a group of academics sitting around discoursing his theology.
I also couldn't help wondering about the social lives of the theologians at the conference. What kind of person would it take to be friends with, or be married to intellectuals of this degree? Or did they have a social life outside of academic theology? I did notice that most of them had rings on their ring fingers, so that, to me, was a little bit of a reassurance that they weren't all head and no heart. But I wondered about social-hierarchy, and if their lives brought them to points of interaction with persons from a different social class.
Because as it comes down to it, I'd like to think that Bonhoeffer didn't spend all his time only interacting with his family or other theologians. Sure, Life Together seemed to indicate his commitment to the monastic lifestyle of not just physical living together in community, but the togetherness of practicing spiritual disciplines. But if Bonhoeffer's understanding of gemeinschaft only took him to the point of practising social justice and reconciliation in the conspiracy against Hitler and not beyond that, then perhaps his interaction with Lutheran theology has not done him much good.
Also, I've come to really appreciate the German differentiation between kirche and gemeinde. Given the way my dealings with kirche have been in the last few years, it's easy to get the two intertwined and lose faith completely. But in the discoursing between kirche (the church) and gemeinde (fellowship/community), I'm reminded again that even if the reality of the kirche doesn't quite match up to my idealism, it doesn't mean that I should compromise on my standing with the gemeinde.
Which strangely, leads me to a piece that I was working on on the three hour drive up to the University of Notre Dame for this conference...
Dear You,
You taught me we were family, and that you were the one that set the rules for the way we worked as a family. But four years ago, reality taught me that the rules you gave us only caused much hurt amongst my brothers and sisters because we all interpreted your rules differently. I found myself asking, what have you done to our fundamental value of love?
Four years later, we are back here again. In the last four years, I've tried to let go of my feelings of hurt and move toward forgiveness and reconciliation. But here we are again. All these rules, all over again, reminding me of wounds that have been tended to for a little while, then left aside so that healing can take place following the course of nature. But with this new lashing out, can you blame me for wanting to give up and walk away?
Grace. If the Greater Being in the form of the Word were to be the example for which I should live, then I confess I am inadequate for grace is something I am greatly lacking in. For the Word became Flesh, and grace upon grace for all my inadequacies. And if that Grace in its humanity can be grace and grace again for me, should it not be within me to extend this grace to another?
But the Word become Flesh is not simply Grace upon grace, but also Jehovah Rapha, the Healer that lavishes Grace upon grace to heal the broken me and the broken you.
And so, grace upon grace to you. I'd love to walk away, and if not because we were family, I would have done so a long, long time ago.
I have a feeling this might be the first of many Bonhoeffer blog posts to come. Quite honestly, I still dislike being associated with theology, but if that qualification allows me tosound like a nerd write passionately about things that I really care about from time to time on my blog, then I'm really not all that sorry. And while my sociological approach to theology may not take me to a place where I can discourse with you on the likes of Foucault, Lacoste and Heidegger, I'd rather be understood by the common people that I'm used to living life with than be dressed up to the nines to have a conversation with some big-wigs.
"How was your dead friend Dietrich?"
I had to laugh.
It wasn't just that I was amused by Emily, but I was more amused by the fact that... I'm "friends" with a dead-white-male-theologian.
Yes, I'm giving you permission to judge me for my dead-man crush on Dietrich Bonhoeffer, German pastor and theologian (and son, brother, friend, martyr... the list goes on). After all, I was the one who, just before I started my SOT application, told the guy who eventually became my theology professor that I was no theologian, nor was I interested in ever becoming one. I will have to applaud Greg Robertson and Arthur Kelly for their graciousness in not calling me out on how little I knew about theology to even decide that I wasn't a theologian.
So yes, I just spent the last two days at a conference where the theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer was discoursed. And yes, my brain is exhausted from trying so hard to tear apart words like pneumatology, christo-ecclesialogy, and entering into conversations with folks like Foucault, Lacoste and Heidegger. But it's also wide awake with all these new pieces of Bonhoefferian theology that I hadn't thought about before.
Now we all know that as much as possible, I avoid blogging academia because God only knows how little I know about academia and how hard I try not to bore people with it. So if this entry gets a little weird and boring, I apologise in advance.
See, here's the thing. Aside from Luther, the next closest theologian that I would "categorise" Bonhoeffer with is Henri Nouwen. Granted I haven't had much direct interaction with either of those, but the God-Self-Community interactions that Bonhoeffer and Nouwen bring to the theological table draw similar parallels to my own theology of the Trinity. This was something that I pieced together tentatively in a paper for Strege's Constructive Theology I, way back in the day, but something I still stand by. I'm excited enough about this whole thing to want to get into this now, but I also need to be at work in a few hours and sleep is kind of a necessary part of life, so ask me about this another time.
But the slight differential I see between Bonhoeffer and Nouwen is that Bonhoeffer's attempt to live out his theology of God-Self-Community (I'm choosing the word community here rather than the word "other" because community is more inclusive) is more blatant. Nouwen's theology seem more... "Cognitive" (A word I learnt from Jacob Coppess, a friend I'm coming to appreciate more and more, this weekend) whereas Bonhoeffer's writings seem to be more of an interaction between the struggles of his personal experience and the decisions he has to make.
There were moments at this conference where I found myself thinking, I wonder what Bonhoeffer would think if he were present. I'd like to think he wouldn't so much be offended by the possible misinterpretations of his writing, as much as I wonder what he would have thought about a group of academics sitting around discoursing his theology.
I also couldn't help wondering about the social lives of the theologians at the conference. What kind of person would it take to be friends with, or be married to intellectuals of this degree? Or did they have a social life outside of academic theology? I did notice that most of them had rings on their ring fingers, so that, to me, was a little bit of a reassurance that they weren't all head and no heart. But I wondered about social-hierarchy, and if their lives brought them to points of interaction with persons from a different social class.
Because as it comes down to it, I'd like to think that Bonhoeffer didn't spend all his time only interacting with his family or other theologians. Sure, Life Together seemed to indicate his commitment to the monastic lifestyle of not just physical living together in community, but the togetherness of practicing spiritual disciplines. But if Bonhoeffer's understanding of gemeinschaft only took him to the point of practising social justice and reconciliation in the conspiracy against Hitler and not beyond that, then perhaps his interaction with Lutheran theology has not done him much good.
Also, I've come to really appreciate the German differentiation between kirche and gemeinde. Given the way my dealings with kirche have been in the last few years, it's easy to get the two intertwined and lose faith completely. But in the discoursing between kirche (the church) and gemeinde (fellowship/community), I'm reminded again that even if the reality of the kirche doesn't quite match up to my idealism, it doesn't mean that I should compromise on my standing with the gemeinde.
Which strangely, leads me to a piece that I was working on on the three hour drive up to the University of Notre Dame for this conference...
Dear You,
You taught me we were family, and that you were the one that set the rules for the way we worked as a family. But four years ago, reality taught me that the rules you gave us only caused much hurt amongst my brothers and sisters because we all interpreted your rules differently. I found myself asking, what have you done to our fundamental value of love?
Four years later, we are back here again. In the last four years, I've tried to let go of my feelings of hurt and move toward forgiveness and reconciliation. But here we are again. All these rules, all over again, reminding me of wounds that have been tended to for a little while, then left aside so that healing can take place following the course of nature. But with this new lashing out, can you blame me for wanting to give up and walk away?
Grace. If the Greater Being in the form of the Word were to be the example for which I should live, then I confess I am inadequate for grace is something I am greatly lacking in. For the Word became Flesh, and grace upon grace for all my inadequacies. And if that Grace in its humanity can be grace and grace again for me, should it not be within me to extend this grace to another?
But the Word become Flesh is not simply Grace upon grace, but also Jehovah Rapha, the Healer that lavishes Grace upon grace to heal the broken me and the broken you.
And so, grace upon grace to you. I'd love to walk away, and if not because we were family, I would have done so a long, long time ago.
I have a feeling this might be the first of many Bonhoeffer blog posts to come. Quite honestly, I still dislike being associated with theology, but if that qualification allows me to