Christ For Us Today

Promeity in the Christologies of Bonhoeffer and Kierkegaard

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In 1944, Bonhoeffer famously asked ‘Who is Christ really, for us today?’ This question is ambiguous: ‘Christ for us’ points to an objective claim concerning the personal identity of Christ, while ‘for us today’ signals the need for ever new subjective value judgements and contextual appropriations. Does emphasis upon the promeity of Christ, like that found in the work of Bonhoeffer, volatilize the identity of Christ? Examination of the theme of promeity in the work of Bonhoeffer himself, as well as that of Kierkegaard, demonstrates that in the hands of both these Lutheran theologians promeity is acknowledged to be intrinsic to the fides quae creditur. The subjective appropriation and contextual character of Christology then proves to be a function of a prior and more decisive reality, namely the very identity of God in Christ for us.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)25-41
Number of pages16
JournalInternational Journal of Systematic Theology
Volume15
Issue number1
Early online date12 Nov 2012
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2013

Fingerprint

Christ
Søren Kierkegaard
Christologies
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Appropriation
Contextual
Lutheran
Value Judgements
Christology
Personal Identity
Intrinsic
Deity
Theologians

Cite this

Christ For Us Today : Promeity in the Christologies of Bonhoeffer and Kierkegaard. / Ziegler, Philip.

In: International Journal of Systematic Theology, Vol. 15, No. 1, 01.2013, p. 25-41.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{51463ff84c984083ba8c081704381093,
title = "Christ For Us Today: Promeity in the Christologies of Bonhoeffer and Kierkegaard",
abstract = "In 1944, Bonhoeffer famously asked ‘Who is Christ really, for us today?’ This question is ambiguous: ‘Christ for us’ points to an objective claim concerning the personal identity of Christ, while ‘for us today’ signals the need for ever new subjective value judgements and contextual appropriations. Does emphasis upon the promeity of Christ, like that found in the work of Bonhoeffer, volatilize the identity of Christ? Examination of the theme of promeity in the work of Bonhoeffer himself, as well as that of Kierkegaard, demonstrates that in the hands of both these Lutheran theologians promeity is acknowledged to be intrinsic to the fides quae creditur. The subjective appropriation and contextual character of Christology then proves to be a function of a prior and more decisive reality, namely the very identity of God in Christ for us.",
author = "Philip Ziegler",
year = "2013",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1468-2400.2012.00656.x",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "25--41",
journal = "International Journal of Systematic Theology",
issn = "1463-1652",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Christ For Us Today

T2 - Promeity in the Christologies of Bonhoeffer and Kierkegaard

AU - Ziegler, Philip

PY - 2013/1

Y1 - 2013/1

N2 - In 1944, Bonhoeffer famously asked ‘Who is Christ really, for us today?’ This question is ambiguous: ‘Christ for us’ points to an objective claim concerning the personal identity of Christ, while ‘for us today’ signals the need for ever new subjective value judgements and contextual appropriations. Does emphasis upon the promeity of Christ, like that found in the work of Bonhoeffer, volatilize the identity of Christ? Examination of the theme of promeity in the work of Bonhoeffer himself, as well as that of Kierkegaard, demonstrates that in the hands of both these Lutheran theologians promeity is acknowledged to be intrinsic to the fides quae creditur. The subjective appropriation and contextual character of Christology then proves to be a function of a prior and more decisive reality, namely the very identity of God in Christ for us.

AB - In 1944, Bonhoeffer famously asked ‘Who is Christ really, for us today?’ This question is ambiguous: ‘Christ for us’ points to an objective claim concerning the personal identity of Christ, while ‘for us today’ signals the need for ever new subjective value judgements and contextual appropriations. Does emphasis upon the promeity of Christ, like that found in the work of Bonhoeffer, volatilize the identity of Christ? Examination of the theme of promeity in the work of Bonhoeffer himself, as well as that of Kierkegaard, demonstrates that in the hands of both these Lutheran theologians promeity is acknowledged to be intrinsic to the fides quae creditur. The subjective appropriation and contextual character of Christology then proves to be a function of a prior and more decisive reality, namely the very identity of God in Christ for us.

U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-2400.2012.00656.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1468-2400.2012.00656.x

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 25

EP - 41

JO - International Journal of Systematic Theology

JF - International Journal of Systematic Theology

SN - 1463-1652

IS - 1

ER -