Bonhoeffer's Theology of the Cross: The Influence of Luther in 'Act and Being' (Dogmatik in Der Moderne)

Bonhoeffer's academic work is neglected in Bonhoeffer scholarship. In this study, J.I. de Keijzer aims to contribute to a better understanding of Bonhoeffer by examining the intellectual roots of his "Act and Being," a notoriously inaccessible book, but one crucially important for grasping Bonhoeffer's theology. The author begins with an examination of Bonhoeffer's dialogue with Barth to find out how both theologians interacted with Luther's "theologia crucis." The conclusion that Bonhoeffer deviates significantly from Barth's theological trajectory leads to another discussion in "Act and Being," this time with Heidegger. J.I. de Keijzer shows how Bonhoeffer borrows from Heidegger's ontology to articulate an alternative "theologia crucis" that is characterized by a greater fidelity to Luther and a theological method that brings Christology, epistemology, hermeneutics, ecclesiology, and ethics together. Cover Titel Acknowledgments Table of Contents List of Abbreviations Chapter 1: Introduction: Confessions of a Crypto-Lutheran 1.1 A Forest of Bonhoeffer Interpretations 1.2 A Lutheran Bonhoeffer 1.3 Act and Being as Theologia Crucis 1.4 Overview Chapter 2: Fate or Idea: Bonhoeffer as Subversive Reader of Barth 2.1 Material Evidence 2.2 Historical Context 2.3 Barth’s Argument in Fate and Idea 2.4 Differences and Similarities 2.5 Drawing Conclusions 2.5.1 Influence and Disagreement 2.5.2 Act and Being as Alternative 2.5.3 Developing a Theologia Crucis Chapter 3: Crucis or Crisis: Bonhoeffer and Barth 3.1 Hermeneutical Preamble 3.2 Different Readings of a Relationship 3.3 Encounter and Dialogue 3.4 Bonhoeffer’s Critique of Barth 3.4.1 Communio Sanctorum 3.4.2 Act and Being 3.4.3 Inaugural Speech 3.4.4 Letters and Papers from Prison 3.5 The Theologia Crucis in Barth 3.5.1. Bradbury’s Claim 3.5.2 Case Studies in Barth 3.5.3 Hunsinger’s Motifs 3.6 Spatial Metaphors 3.7 Scaling the Distance Chapter 4: Distance or Presence: Exploring the Theologia Crucis 4.1 Background of the Theologia Crucis 4.1.1 Luther and Scholasticism 4.1.2 Theologia Crucis as Response to Scholasticism 4.2 Theologia Crucis as Distance 4.2.1 Loewenich 4.2.2 McGrath 4.3 The Theology of the Cross in Philosophy 4.3.1 Kant and Kierkegaard on Distance 4.3.2 Hegel on Presence 4.4 Presence Emphasized 4.4.1 Simpson 4.4.2 Jüngel 4.5 Elements of a Theologia Crucis Chapter 5: Theologia Crucis as Act and Being 5.1 Act and Being 5.2 Theologia Crucis as Act 5.2.1 Epistemological Distance in Barth 5.2.2 Bonhoeffer’s Critique of Barth Revisited 5.2.3 Barth as Crypto Medieval Nominalist? 5.3 Theologia Crucis as Being 5.3.1 Theologia Crucis as Community 5.3.2 Sanctorum Communio Sub Contrario 5.3.3 Stellvertreter: Community-of-the-Cross 5.4 Grafting Presence onto Being Chapter 6: Christ’s and Christs: Bonhoeffer and Heidegger 6.1 With and Without the Apostrophe 6.2 Heidegger in Bonhoeffer Scholarship 6.2.1 Charles Marsh 6.2.2 Steven Plant 6.2.3 Michael DeJonge 6.2.4 Christiane Tietz-Steiding 6.2.5 Evaluation 6.3 Bonhoeffer’s Evaluation of Heidegger 6.4 The Coordination of Act and Being 6.5 The Analogical Use of Philosophy Chapter 7: Act and Being as Theologia Crucis 7.1 Summary of the Argument 7.2 The Coordination of Act and Being 7.3 Heidegger’s Being and the Theologia Crucis 7.3.1 The Completion of Bonhoeffer’s Argument 7.3.2 Theologia Crucis as Community 7.3.3 Three-fold Function of the Theologia Crucis 7.3.4 Cross Typologies Revisited 7.4 Bonhoeffer Scholarship 7.4.1 Important Themes in Bonhoeffer 7.4.2 Some Areas of Interest Bibliography Index Indem er sich mit Bonhoeffers Dialog mit Barth und Heidegger in »Akt und Sein« beschäftigt, zeigt J.I. de Keijzer wie Bonhoeffer sowohl in seiner kritischen Bewertung von Barths Dialektik als auch in seiner Verwendung von Heideggers Ontologie eine zeitgemäße »Theologia crucis« formuliert, die sich als zutiefst von Luther beeinflusst herausstellt. -- Back cover: Engaging Bonhoeffer's dialogues with Barth and Heidegger in "Act and Being," J.I. de Keijzer shows how Bonhoeffer both in his critical assessment of Barth's dialectic and his appropriation of Heidegger's ontology articulates a contemporary "theologica crucis" that proves to be deeply influenced by Luther