Bonhoe Er's Ecclesial Hermeneutic the Practice of Biblical
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Durham E-Theses Bonhoeer's Ecclesial Hermeneutic The Practice of Biblical Interpretation in 1930s Germany ROSS, JAMESON,EAN How to cite: ROSS, JAMESON,EAN (2019) Bonhoeer's Ecclesial Hermeneutic The Practice of Biblical Interpretation in 1930s Germany , Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/13120/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 Bonhoeffer’s Ecclesial Hermeneutic The Practice of Biblical Interpretation in 1930s Germany By Jameson E. Ross Abstract This thesis argues that Dietrich Bonhoeffer was above all a biblical interpreter. It contributes to scholarship on Bonhoeffer by attending to his interpretive practice in the 1930s. Bonhoeffer’s ecclesial hermeneutic consists of a self- reflective form of interpretation in which the ecclesial context is taken for granted, creating and shaping a closely related hermeneutical framework and interpretive practice. In its structure the thesis shows this coordinated relationship by oscillating between Bonhoeffer’s explicit hermeneutical reflections (theory) and his actual interpretation of biblical texts (practice). Demonstrating how this relationship is carried out in detail, the thesis offers close readings of texts. After the Introduction situates the argument in relation to Bonhoeffer scholarship and outlines the project, chapter 1 shows that Bonhoeffer’s biblical interpretation in the 1930s is indebted to the ecclesial hermeneutic he developed already in 1925 in a student essay. Ecclesial acts of theology and preaching proceed through “pneumatische Auslegung,” interpretation on the basis of the Spirit. That hermeneutical framework is on display in his 1932 book, Schöpfung und Fall, (chapter 2) and in his sermons from London in 1933-1935 (chapter 3). These new contexts forced further development of it, so that in 1935, in new circumstances again, Bonhoeffer reflected on hermeneutical questions, producing a textured version of his earlier ecclesial hermeneutic (chapter 4). As the analysis of interpretive acts in chapters 2 and 3 displayed how the 1925 hermeneutic worked, so chapter 5 returns to interpretive activity in order to show what the newly inflected ecclesial hermeneutic of the Finkenwalde period looks like in practice by analyzing two sections of Nachfolge. The Conclusion suggests that Bonhoeffer’s relation to Scripture is best understood by utilizing the doctrinal resources of Pneumatology, carefully relating divine and human action in interpretation, and that his ecclesial hermeneutic contributes to conversations about how to interpret Scripture today. Bonhoeffer’s Ecclesial Hermeneutic The Practice of Biblical Interpretation in 1930s Germany By Jameson E. Ross Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Durham Department of Theology and Religion February 2019 Contents A Note on Translation viii Abbreviations ix Statement of Copyright x Acknowledgments xi Introduction 1 1. Listening in on Bonhoeffer Reading Scripture 1 2. The Thesis in Conversation with Bonhoeffer Scholarship 5 3. The Scope, Structure and Plan of the Thesis 9 3.1. Scope 9 3.2. Structure 13 3.3. Plan 14 Chapter 1 17 1. Preliminaries 18 1.1. The Setting of Bonhoeffer’s 1925 Paper 18 1.2. The Biographical Setting of Bonhoeffer’s 1925 Paper 20 1.2.1. To what time period is he referring? 21 1.2.2. Do we have reason to question his account? 22 1.2.3. What does he mean by coming to the Bible? 24 2. The Content of Bonhoeffer’s 1925 Paper 25 2.1. Exposition 25 2.1.1. Introduction and Historical Interpretation 25 2.1.2. Pneumatological Interpretation 26 2.1.3. Relating Types of Interpretation 34 2.1.4. Dogmatics and Conclusion 45 3. Synthesis 46 3.1. Revelation and Scripture 47 3.2. Theology and History 48 3.3. Spirit and Interpreter 49 4. The Trajectory from Bonhoeffer’s 1925 Paper 51 4.1. What role does the Bible play in this paper? 51 4.2. What expectations arise from the paper of 1925? 54 5. Conclusion 55 Chapter 2 56 1. Preliminaries 57 1.1. Methodological Matters 57 1.1.1. Theory and Practice 57 v 1.1.2. Close Readings and Selection of Texts 58 1.2. The Context of the Lectures 60 2. Close Readings 63 2.1. Creation: Genesis 2:7 64 2.1.1. Biblical Text 64 2.1.2. Bonhoeffer’s Commentary 65 2.2. Fall: Genesis 3:8-13 81 2.2.1. Biblical Text 81 2.2.2. Bonhoeffer’s Commentary 82 3. Synthesis 94 Chapter 3 97 1. Preliminaries 99 1.1. Close Readings and Selection of Texts 99 1.2. The Context of the Sermons 100 1.2.1. Jeremiah 20:7 102 1.2.2. 1 Corinthians 13:13 104 2. Close Readings 104 2.1. Jeremiah 20:7 104 2.1.1. Biblical Text 104 2.1.2. Bonhoeffer’s Sermon 106 2.2. 1 Corinthians 13:13 117 2.2.1. Biblical Text 117 2.2.2. Bonhoeffer’s Sermon 118 3. Synthesis 135 Chapter 4 140 1. Preliminaries 141 1.1. From London to Finkenwalde 141 1.2. Bonhoeffer’s Emotional State 142 1.3. The Setting of the Lecture 145 2. Exposition 146 2.1. Bonhoeffer’s Lecture, Part 1 149 2.1.1. Introduction 149 2.1.2. Negative Form 150 2.1.3. Positive Form 155 2.2. Bonhoeffer’s Lecture, Part 2 161 2.2.1. Method for the Negative Form 164 2.2.2. Method for the Positive Form 165 2.2.3. Two Questions 167 2.3. Bonhoeffer’s Lecture, Part 3 169 2.3.1. The New Testament as Witness 169 2.3.2. Our Witness 174 3. Synthesis 177 vi Chapter 5 180 1. Preliminaries 182 1.1. The Production of Nachfolge 182 1.2. Selection Criteria 184 2. Close Readings 185 2.1. Bonhoeffer’s Exposition of Matthew 6:25-34 185 2.1.1. Matthew 6:25-34 in Nachfolge 185 2.1.2. Bonhoeffer’s Biblical Text 186 2.1.3. Commentary on Matthew 6:25-34 187 2.2. Bonhoeffer on Baptism 200 2.2.1. Baptism in the Context of Nachfolge 200 2.2.2. Introductory Section to Baptism 201 2.2.3. Commentary on Baptism 204 3. Synthesis 214 Conclusion 221 Appendix: Original Translation of Bonhoeffer’s 1925 Student Paper 231 1. Introduction: Presentation of the Problem 231 2. Historical Interpretation: methods and applications on the NT 231 3. Pneumatological Interpretation 233 3.1. Reduced Concept of Revelation 233 3.2. Proper Concept of Revelation and Scripture 235 4. Historical Interpretation and Pneumatological Interpretation 237 5. Dogmatics, Congregation, Preaching and Conclusion 242 Bibliography 244 vii A Note on Translation Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations are from the Holy Bible, New International Version, copyright 2011 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. In rare instances I have found it necessary to amend the NIV, and where this has been the case I have indicated it in a footnote. I will quote from DBW in the thesis and provide my own English translations. This is the case for two reasons. It is important for me, as an English-speaking scholar, to interact with Bonhoeffer’s texts in his own language so that I am enabled to hear him rather than his translators. In addition, I have found the translations of the volumes in DBWE to vary significantly in quality. Translating the texts myself meant making decisions about Bonhoeffer’s use of language regarding gender. I have sought to use gender-inclusive language where possible, but it is often the case that I stayed with Bonhoeffer’s use in order to honor him in his time and place and to avoid using cumbersome or awkward phrases to render his usage gender-inclusive. For example, the outdated use of “Er” will be translated with the masculine pronoun in English in order to respect Bonhoeffer’s choice of words in the 1930s context in which he was writing. However, “der Mensch” will be translated with the more general “person” (unless it refers back to a singular, masculine noun or pronoun) because a general meaning is consistent with Bonhoeffer’s usage. viii Abbreviations DBW Dietrich Bonhoeffer Werke, German edition DBWE Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, English edition NIV Holy Bible, New International Version All other abbreviations adhere to the forms found in the SBL Handbook of Style, 2nd ed. (Atlanta: SBL Press), 2014. ix The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without the author’s prior written consent and information derived from it should be acknowledged. Acknowledgments My primary supervisor, Francis Watson, made himself available for many meetings over the last few years, most of which lasted two or more hours. This was the result of his commitment to reading primary texts in their original languages, his love of learning and his commitment to me and the project, expressed to a large degree in his careful reading of and incisive comments on thesis drafts, comments that, time and again, made it much better.