The first paper I presented was an argument for a positive and affirming theology in support of homosexual unions using the theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. I presented a similar paper at last year’s session where I looked at important passages specific on the topic of marriage that Bonhoeffer addressed and then examined the use of his concept of responsible marriage while in conversation with Bernd Wannenwelsch. This new paper focused primarily on three conceptual themes that also support a broader and affirming position on homosexual unions. These were: the use of de-genderized language in Bonhoeffer’s theological writing, the use and misuse of procreation as an apology for marriage, and the ontological argument for sin as opposed to a deontological one.
My second paper was presented on a shift in the ethical language used to determine candidacy at Yad Vashem’s Gentile Holocaust Memorial. I looked at Dietrich Bonhoeffer once more, whose petition was denied on multiple occasions, to understand what reasons may have been motivating such decisions. It was my argument that this change in ethical language is largely to blame since the principle of pekuach nefesh (saving a life) – in this case a Jewish life was a guiding principle that replaced the ethical groundwork upon which the concept of the ger toshav was built. A second examination looked at how the Germans became the embodiment of evil immediately following Nuremberg, and that any association with them had to be challenged. I ended up moderating this session as well, and the papers were as diverse as they were engaging.
This coming month includes a lot of writing as well, including a very long paper on theodicy in Jewish theology for my independent studies class. More reading and writing for my Hindu Studies class. And finally, this week I had my thesis proposal accepted. So the next phase of my writing journey begins. I promise to get to my Bonhoeffer manuscript soon as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment