Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Lectures on Christology in 1933 26 May 2016 1.0 Introduction Christology is a central area of study within Christian theology among Church circles. It firstly dealt with the character and being of Jesus Christ in accordance with the canonical Gospels and epistles of the New Testament. This paper deals specifically with Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Lectures on Christology in 1933. The Christology of Bonhoeffer is often misinterpreted. Thus, I attempt to evaluate a few key portions of his development of the Christological Questions. Larry L. Rasmussen, “Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works,” DBWE 12:300-303. It is essential to initially deal with the fundamental components of his Christology sufficiently. The emphasis of this paper is that an adequate discernment of Bonhoeffer’s foundation of Christology is crucial not only to understand subsequent portions of his Christology but also his later writings and his contribution to Christian spirituality. I commence with an interaction on Bonhoeffer’s definition of Christology and then end with the scholarly questions that are often discussed in Christology. 1.1 Bonhoeffer’s Definition of Christology Christology in its context It is very interesting how Bonhoeffer right from the beginning of his development of the Christological Question identifies and puts Christology in its context as a field of study. It is a very distinctive area of scholarship and he provides a specific definition of what he means by Christology. This is a strength of Bonhoeffer’s argument. As he writes, Christology, as the doctrine about Christ, is a rather peculiar area of scholarship, [to the extent that]…Christology as doctrine, speaks, about the Word of God. Christ is the Logos of God. Christology is logology…The Logos we are talking about here is a human person who is the transcendent. Ibid., 301. This shows the uniqueness of Christology for Bonhoeffer. Also, Christ as the Word of God is not the Bible. Rather, it is a living person who is transcendent and yet present in the world. Christology is Different Further to that, he establishes a scope and boundaries of his claim to differentiate Christology from any other area of scholarship. To Bonhoeffer, Christology is one-of-a-kind because “Christ is the very Word of God.” Ibid., 301. This means that it cannot be treated or mixed up with any other human knowledge as “It is the study of par excellence...” Ibid., 301. In other words, Christology is like the Vine while other knowledge is the branches. It is the reason that all knowledge exists, while at the same time it is superior and above all other knowledge. On a deeper level, Bonhoeffer’s differentiation of Christology highlights the pre-existence of Christ and his position in creation. One of the relevant biblical pas is John’s gospel, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. (John 1:1-3) All quotations from the Bible are from the NIV, unless otherwise indicated. This verse is significant to Bonhoeffer’s argument as Christ is not only the Logos that was at the beginning with God yet Christ is God. This is the Christ that Christology is concerned. This is the starting point of how uniqueness Christology is for Bonhoeffer. In addition to that, Bonhoeffer’s Christology also emphasises the biblical concept of Christ which is God’s anointed one. Christ is sanctified and set apart by God. He is a particular person anointed like no other as he is called the Only Begotten Son of God. Hence, arguably, this is one reason why Bonhoeffer claims Christology as an area of scholarship, which is different from any other human knowledge. He argues, “…Christology, as the doctrine about Christ, is a rather peculiar area of scholarship,…Christology becomes the centre of knowledge.” Larry L. Rasmussen, DBWE 12:301 This points to Bonhoeffer’s claim that Christology is the centre of all knowledge. Christology is the Centre of Knowledge Bonhoeffer claims Christology to be the centre of the sphere of knowledge, it stands alone. It cannot point to anything other than the transcendence of its object. Ibid., 301. What he is saying here is that Christology cannot be treated the same way as human knowledge. Strictly speaking, nothing compares to it. It is beyond human capacity and comprehension. This reflects the conviction of Job, “How great is God--beyond our understanding! The number of his years is past finding out” (Job 36:26). The apostle Paul also supports this, “…How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!” (Romans 11:33b). It follows that Bonhoeffer argues that the transcendence of the object of Christology, which is Christ, is always merely the prerequisite of human thinking, never the proof. Ibid., 301. What this means is that this is an acceptable requirement of human thoughts about Christology. The limitation of human ability cannot fully grasp the transcendence of Christ and prove his existence. By way of illustration, the idea that Christ the Logos of God became flesh as human person is conditional to human understanding. Such knowledge cannot be either controlled by human efforts or proven with philosophical knowledge: unless Christ is willing to reveal himself. This is one reason why Bonhoeffer claims that Christ is the centre of all knowledge. To Bonhoeffer, this truth can only be understood within the realm of the Christian church. That is, Christology is the centre of the realm of scholarship itself. It is the invisible, unrecognized, hidden centre of scholarship, of the universitas litterarum. Ibid., 301. This is what the Apostle Paul emphasises in Colossians, My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” (Colossians 2:2-3). Since the knowledge of Christ is mysterious and hidden, the understanding of human beings about Christology can only be right when the point of departure is in and through Christ himself as the centre of knowledge. This is where humanity can be able to gain access to the full riches of complete understanding. Other than that the human search for understanding would just be in vain. This leads to the fundamental questions of Christology. 1.2 Questions of Christology Two Questions of Every Scholarship Bonhoeffer insists that all scholarly questions can be summarised into two basic questions, namely, what is the cause of X, and what is the meaning of X? Ibid., 301. On the one hand, the first question concerns with how the causal relationships between the object X with other objects can be understood. On the other hand, the second question focuses on how the object X is being understood in terms of its meaning relationships with other known objects. It is important to note how Bonhoeffer differentiates the two kinds of human knowledge that seeks to understand the reality of something. Both are common in their concern about relationships between objects but vary in their purpose. That is to say, one emphasises the cause while the other stresses the meaning. Further to the two basic questions of scholarship, Bonhoeffer points out the question, how is it possible to classify an object? This is essential for the question of Christology. Ibid., 302. “How” Question With reference to the classification of an object in scientific method, the object is defined, recognized, and understood by means of its possibilities, by means of its “how,” by the immanent logos of human beings. Ibid., 302. This may be workable within the sphere of human knowledge and control. Yet when a reality transcends such classification then human beings cannot explain what it is. This is where the human logos is confronted by the Counter-Logos in which Christ defies all attempts of human beings to master it. In other words, what Bonhoeffer is trying to show is that there is no success in any attempt of human reason alone to grasp the Divine Logos without a proper starting point. The Divine Logos is not only an idea to be studied scientifically but it is the person of the incarnate one. For this reason, the possibility of classification cannot be pursued in Christology. Human beings must try to know its limitation when it deals with the knowledge outside of its existence. They must seek in reverence and submit to the Counter-Logos which implies that they understand. Proverbs reveals this truth, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.” (Proverbs 9:10) When humanity accept that Christ is the centre of all knowledge, they will correctly study to understand him first and then other knowledge of this world follows. Significantly, the limitation of philosophy and scientific method thus proves that the ‘how’ question is the wrong question to be asked when it comes to Christology. That is why Bonhoeffer argues, “The question of “how” is the question about immanence. Therefore, the One who is questioned is the Son himself, the immanent question of “how” can never comprehend him.” Ibid., 302. Therefore, the only question to be asked is, “Who are you?” This is a prominent point in Bonhoeffer’s Christological argument. However, some critics argue that Bonhoeffer came to this conclusion as he was largely influenced by continental philosophers such as Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and Heidegger. While this may be true, it is not the case when Bonhoeffer further discuss what he meant. “Who” Question The question of “Who” is twofold, “It is the question asked by horrified, dethroned human reason, and also the question of faith: Who are you? Are you God’s very self? This is the question with which Christology alone is concerned.” Ibid., 302. Bonhoeffer refers to the “who question” as the question of the identity of Jesus. It is concerned the being, essence, nature and the transcendence of Christ. The question of “who” draws two beings into a relationship in which the one who is asking also understand its existence from the existence of the other. Not only that there is also the question of encountering the boundaries of their own existence from trying to know the other. In Christology, the answer to “who is Christ” also answers the question who are human beings and the world. This not only highlights the essentiality of relationships in understanding Christology but also Christian spirituality. Likewise, love God and love neighbour as oneself. Nevertheless, the Christological work begins within the church in which Christ revealed himself as God’s Word. This is the place where the question of “Who are you, Jesus Christ” is answered. That is, Christ is the Logos of God. In other words, the human logos cannot understand the “who” question outside of the church. It is only through one’s existence and in relation to the church that this can be possible. This is a strength of Bonhoeffer’s argument as it stresses the uniqueness of the church, in terms of position and authority, as Christ’s body in the world. Human beings cannot ask the “who question” without an encounter with Jesus in which Jesus is the initiator and humanity is just the receiver. What Bonhoeffer is saying here is that Jesus in his own will and autonomy has to first reveal himself in order for human beings to ask the “who” question. In other words, it is Jesus who first reveals who he is, from which human beings can then ask the question, “Who are you.” Not only that but Bonhoeffer says that the “who” question can be asked merely within the context of faith, and there it will be an answer. For example, the gospel of Matthew supports this, “But what about you?” he (Jesus) asked. “Who do you say I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. (Matthew 16:15-17) Bonhoeffer also insists, There is only one possibility for me to be truly searching for God—that I already know who God is. There is no such thing as blindly setting out to search for God. I can only search for what has already been found. Ibid., 303 1.3 Conclusion This essay dealt specifically with Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Lectures on Christology in 1933 and has managed to evaluate some key portions of his development of the Christological Questions. It highlights the importance of having a deeper interaction with Bonhoeffer’s foundation of his Christological questions. It is also essential to initially deal with the fundamental components of his Christology sufficiently. Bonhoeffer has shown that human beings cannot understand God unless they start with Christ as the key entrance to all knowledge. To Bonhoeffer, this would only happen within relationship in the Church through faith in Christ. Therefore, an adequate discernment of Bonhoeffer’s foundation of Christology is crucial not only to understand subsequent portions of his Christology but also his later writings and his contributions to Christian spirituality. Reference Rasmussen, Larry L., ed. Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works. Translated by Isabel Best and David Higgins. 12 vols. 1932-1933. 9