Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T03:53:43.441Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sexuality and community in the theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 February 2018

Michael Brain
Michael Brain*
Affiliation:
Wycliffe College, 5 Hoskin Ave, Toronto, ON M5S 1H7michael.brain@mail.utoronto.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article suggests that the narrative of human community Bonhoeffer described in Sanctorum Communio, following the categories of creation, fall and redemption, provides the framework for understanding the various aspects of human sexuality found in Creation and Fall and Ethics. A comparative study of these texts reveals that marriage and sexuality in Bonhoeffer encapsulates the human drive towards community, preserved from the fall for redemption in Christ. Understanding human sexuality within the structure of this narrative allows for a new way of appropriating and evaluating Bonhoeffer's theological anthropology for contemporary ethical reflection in the Christian community.

Keywords

anthropologyDietrich Bonhoeffercreationethicsmarriagesexuality
Type
Research Article
Information
Scottish Journal of Theology , Volume 71 , Issue 1 , February 2018 , pp. 67 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Ruether, Rosemary Radford, ‘A Query to Daniel Sullivan: Bonhoeffer on Sexuality’, Continuum 4/3 (1966), p. 457.Google Scholar

2 Reynolds, Terrence, ‘Dietrich Bonhoeffer's Encouragement of Human Love: A Radical Shift in his Later Theology’, Union Seminary Quarterly Review, 41/3–4 (1987), pp. 67–8Google Scholar.

3 While there is a shift in tone and more nuance after the publication of Discipleship, there is substantial continuity between the early and later works. For contemporary arguments for Bonhoeffer's consistency, see Stephen Plant, Bonhoeffer (New York: Continuum, 2004), pp. 94–6, 104–5; DeJonge, Michael, Bonhoeffer's Theological Formation: Berlin, Barth, and Protestant Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 13–14, 143–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, Sanctorum Communio: A Theological Study of the Sociology of the Church, vol. 1 of Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, trans. Krauss, Reinhard and Lukens, Nancy, ed. Green, Clifford J. (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1998), pp. 32–3.Google Scholar

5 Ibid., p. 42.

6 Floyd, Wayne Whitson Jr., Theology and the Dialectics of Otherness: On Reading Bonhoeffer and Adorno (Lanham, MD: University Press of America), pp. 8–9, 24–5.Google Scholar

7 Ibid., pp. 27–8.

8 Bonhoeffer, Sanctorum Communio, p. 49.

9 Ibid., pp. 50–1.

10 Ibid., p. 54.

11 Ibid.

12 Thus, Bonhoeffer presented a mediating position between transcendental idealism and a philosophy of dialogue. Marsh, Charles, ‘The Overabundant Self and the Transcendental Tradition: Dietrich Bonhoeffer on the Self-Reflective Subject’, Journal of the American Academy of Religion 60/4 (1992), p. 662.Google Scholar

13 Bonhoeffer, Sanctorum Communio, pp. 58–64.

14 Ibid., p. 88.

15 Ibid., p. 107.

16 Ibid., p. 141.

17 Ibid., pp. 142–4.

18 Ibid., pp. 143–4.

19 Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, Creation and Fall: A Theological Exposition of Genesis 1–3, vol. 3 of Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, trans. Bax, Douglas Stephen, ed. de Gruchy, John W. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004), p. 25.Google Scholar

20 Ibid., p. 22.

21 Ibid., p. 63.

22 Ibid., p. 64.

23 Ibid., pp. 98–9.

24 Ibid., p. 100.

25 Green, Clifford J., Bonhoeffer: A Theology of Sociality (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999), p. 196 Google Scholar.

26 Bonhoeffer, Creation and Fall, pp. 100–1.

27 Ibid., p. 101.

28 Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, The Cost of Discipleship, trans. Fuller, R. H. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995), pp. 131–3.Google Scholar

29 Bonhoeffer, Creation and Fall, pp. 124–5.

30 Bonhoeffer, Sanctorum Communio, p. 108.

31 Bonhoeffer, Creation and Fall, pp. 122–3; cf. Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, Ethics, vol. 6 of Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, trans. Krauss, Reinhard, West, Charles C., and Scott, Douglas W., ed. Green, Clifford J. (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2005), pp. 303–5.Google Scholar

32 Bonhoeffer, Creation and Fall, pp. 99–100.

33 Bonhoeffer, Ethics, p. 303.

34 Tietz, Christiane, ‘The Mysteries of Knowledge, Sin, and Shame’, in Nielsen, Kirsten Busch et al. (eds), Mysteries in the Theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer: A Copenhagen Bonhoeffer Symposium (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007), pp. 30–2.Google Scholar

35 Bonhoeffer, Creation and Fall, pp. 125–6; Ballor, Jordan J., ‘Christ in Creation: Bonhoeffer's Orders of Preservation and Natural Theology’, Journal of Religion 86/1 (2006), pp. 9–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

36 Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, Letters and Papers from Prison, vol. 8 of Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, trans. Best, Isabel, Dahill, Lisa E., Krauss, Reinhard and Lukens, Nancy, ed. de Gruchy, John W. (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2010), p. 83.Google Scholar

37 Bonhoeffer, Creation and Fall, p. 125.

38 Ibid., p. 140.

39 Ibid., p. 139.

40 Luther, Martin, ‘A Sermon on the Estate of Marriage (1519)’, in Christian in Society I, vol. 44 of Luther's Works, American edn, ed. Atkinson, James (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1966), p. 9 Google Scholar; Luther, Martin, ‘The Estate of Marriage (1522)’, in Christian in Society II, vol. 45 of Luther's Works, American edn, ed. Brandt, Walther I. (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1962), pp. 45–6.Google Scholar

41 Bethge, Eberhard, Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Theologian, Christian, Contemporary, trans. Mosbacher, Eric et al. (London: Collins, 1970), p. 161.Google Scholar

42 Brunner, Emil, The Divine Imperative: A Study in Christian Ethics, trans. Wyon, Olive (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1936), p. 210.Google Scholar

43 Ibid., p. 220.

44 Barth and Bonhoeffer both objected to Brunner's use of the concept of orders, on the grounds that they too easily resembled a type of natural law that rested on a universally accessible rationality, distinct from the revelation of God. However, Bonhoeffer did not completely reject every concept of orders and opted to revise the concept in order to maintain the visibility of Christian ethics. Ballor, ‘Christ in Creation’, pp. 4, 21; Pangritz, Andreas, Karl Barth in the Theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, trans. Barbara, and Rumscheidt, Martin (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), pp. 40–4.Google Scholar

45 Bonhoeffer, Ethics, pp. 68–70, 389.

46 Ibid., p. 174; Harvey, Barry, ‘Preserving the World for Christ: Toward a Theological Engagement with the “Secular”’, Scottish Journal of Theology 61/1 (2008), pp. 71–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

47 Bonhoeffer, Ethics, p. 174.

48 Ibid.

49 Ibid., p. 204.

50 Ibid., p. 210.

51 Isabel Heyward, Carter, The Redemption of God: A Theology of Mutual Relation (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1982), pp. 1–2, 8–9, 217–18.Google Scholar

52 Tietz, Christiane, ‘The Role of Jesus Christ for Christian Theology’, in Mawson, Michael and Ziegler, Philip G. (eds), Christ, Church, and World: New Studies in Bonhoeffer's Theology and Ethics (New York: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2016), p. 23.Google Scholar

53 Bonhoeffer, Ethics, p. 188.

54 Ibid., p. 206.

55 Ibid., p. 211.