Chapter 1 Who Is Dietrich Bonhoeffer for Us Today?
âWho is Christ actually for us today?â1 More than seventy-five years after his death Dietrich Bonhoefferâs question, penned in a Nazi prison cell, still troubles Christianity and catalyses lively theological debate. This in itself is a remarkable phenomenon. From the 1960s onwards the imminent demise of what some have dubbed âthe Bonhoeffer industryâ has been regularly predicted â only to be followed by revivals of interest and fresh outpourings of publications about his life and work. Indeed, âDietrich Bonhoeffer seems to grow in popularity the further his death recedes into the pastâ.2 The Thirteenth International Bonhoeffer Congress which met in January 2020 in Stellenbosch, South Africa, drew 160 participants from six continents: senior academics, younger research students, laypeople and clergy from nearly all church traditions (or none), to address the overall theme, âHow is the coming generation to go on living? Bonhoeffer and the response to our present crisis and hopeâ
As well as plenary lectures, there were more than seventy seminars offered on Bonhoefferâs theology in his own context, and above all on the pertinence of his thought for a wide range of contemporary issues: African religion, Black theology, climate change, medical ethics, guilt and forgiveness in public life, poverty in Central Africa, intergenerational responsibility, interfaith cooperation and much more.
Such a menu of topics might suggest simply an exercise in tagging with the illustrious name of Bonhoeffer whichever issue is a current preoccupation, in order to enhance its importance or to justify the stance being taken on it. That is certainly a danger. But it can equally well be argued that the reason Bonhoeffer is still such a potent figure is not that he himself spoke directly to all the issues we are concerned with now (obviously he did not) but that he offers a profound and original way of looking at the basis of what it is to be human as creatures in Godâs world, a world claimed and redeemed by Christ; and that this is foundational and creative for the whole range of concerns we have for society and Christian for witness within it. We are dealing with fundamental theology.
Bonhoeffer: A changing image
The received image of Bonhoeffer has certainly varied in the course of time. The progressive unfolding and publication of the full range of his writings, the successive studies of him in his historical context, together with the varying perspectives and interests of his readers, have seen to that. In the years immediately after his death it was Bonhoeffer the martyr who first became known in the English-speaking world: the one who had endured two yearsâ imprisonment and then in the last month of war was executed at FlossenbĂŒrg; the one who had refused to bow the knee to the tyrant; the exemplary pastor of the Confessing Church who had lived out and sealed by his own death what in 1937 he had written in his book Nachfolge (Discipleship): âWhen Jesus calls a man, he bids him come and die.â Significantly, when the first English edition appeared in 1949 the title was enlarged to The Cost of Discipleship. In the early 1950s others of his works began to appear in English, notably his Letters and Papers from Prison (1953), and Ethics (1955). The figure of a serious, exploratory theologian began to emerge, which in the early 1960s morphed into that of the radical, even revolutionary, thinker who in his secret prison writings had declared the need for a âChristianity without religionâ in a âworld come of ageâ. In Britain it was John A. T. Robinsonâs Honest to God (1963), which highlighted this version of Bonhoeffer, as did certain of the so-called âdeath of Godâ theologies, particularly in the United States. By the 1970s, however, a more complex and contoured picture was arriving with the publication of Bonhoefferâs earlier works on ecclesiology, biblical theology and Christology, and above all in 1970 with the comprehensive and detailed biography by Bonhoefferâs close friend Eberhard Bethge.3 It was this latter which decisively revised the simplistic martyr-narrative and brought more fully into light Bonhoeffer the willing participant in the conspiracy to overthrow Hitler, with all the moral ambiguity which complicity in an act of violence entailed for the former advocate of pacifism. Political and liberation theologies found an interlocutor in Bonhoeffer, and much debate still focuses on Bonhoeffer the ethicist and his implications for theology in the public realm.
We might well, then, ask, âWho is Dietrich Bonhoeffer actually for us today?â That question was enlivened by the publication in 2010 of the bestselling biography â running into millions worldwide and far outselling any other book on Bonhoeffer â by the American writer Eric Metaxas.4 Fluently written, it is however flawed by an overly selective use of Bonhoefferâs writings (e.g. he dismisses totally the prison letters) and above all a desire to secure Bonhoeffer as a standard-bearer for the neo-conservative American right (Metaxas is an ardent advocate of Donald Trump). If this is a grotesque misuse of Bonhoeffer, it also underlines the need for care by anyone, from any position on the political or theological spectrum, who presumes to interpret Bonhoeffer for today. Integrity requires more than piecemeal citations from Bonhoefferâs immense output. Interpretation must be tested by what can be identified as the core and main thrust of his thinking, and the realities of the context with which he was engaged.
The case for still taking Bonhoeffer seriously, however, has to counter two assumptions. The first is that Bonhoefferâs context of Nazi tyranny was so extreme as to reduce or nullify his relevance for us today â in Britain at any rate, unless one grossly exaggerates our predicaments to apocalyptic dimensions. To this it must be said that Bonhoeffer forged the distinctive tools of his theology well before the advent of Hitler to power in 1933. In his doctoral and postdoctoral dissertations Sanctorum Communio (1927) and Act and Being (1930), respectively, we already see how he fuses a Christ-centred view of revelation (owing much to Karl Barth) with an intensely relational and social understanding of both the church and humanity at large. The church is âChrist existing as church-communityâ; âthe concepts of person, community and God are inseparably and essentially interrelatedâ.5 We are thus truly human only in relationship to others. As early as this, too, we read of the âworldlinessâ of God. Godâs transcendent freedom is not a freedom from but for historical human beings; Godâs choice is âto be placed at the disposal of human beingsâ.6 In 1932 he expounds the petition âThy kingdom comeâ in a way that anticipates what he was to write over a decade later in prison: âWhoever evades Earth in order to find God finds only himself ⊠He who loves God, loves God as the Lord of all the earth as it is; he loves the earth, loves it as Godâs earth.â7 Bonhoefferâs theological tools were to be sharpened during the Third Reich, but they were already to hand in the tottering democracy and disintegrating society of the Weimar Republic. Moreover, his later theology in parts of his wartime Ethics, and certainly in his prison writings, was anticipating the situation of a post-Hitler, post-war world in which the question facing the church would not be whether it would be persecuted but whether it would be noticed at all.
The second assumption is closely related. It is that Bonhoefferâs theology developed in a linear fashion, punctuated by sharp turns and a final breakthrough from a âchurchlyâ to a âworldlyâ emphasis, culminating in the âreligionlessâ theology of the prison writings.
Arguments then develop on where the most decisive break was made. Between Discipleship and Ethics? Between Ethics and the prison writings? Or somewhere within the prison writings, most likely at the end of April 1944 when he asks the âWho is Christ?â question, marking the start of the âradicalâ letters? There are, however, notable continuities in Bonhoefferâs thinking. The main ingredients remain markedly consistent: a heavily Christocentric, biblically based view of revelation; a determinedly social, anti-individualist understanding of human nature; faith seen as always rooted in this world and worldly responsibility; a suspicion of religion as the human attempt to place God where God can be made to serve partisan human purposes; or as an escape from this world, instead of faith as the acceptance of being with the suffering Christ, the one whom God chooses to be on earth. These ingredients are always found together, though not always with the same emphasis, just as the themes of an orchestral symphony may continually appear and reappear, one for a time in a more leading role than others, but none of them ever completely absent from the score.
So for example in Discipleship the main focus is on the narrow way, the exclusive relationship of faith to Jesus Christ in opposition to the claims of the false lords of this world, bedecked with swastikas or other symbols of power. But at the end of that book, the narrow defile of discipleship suddenly opens out into a panorama of the whole world seen anew, because the one who is to be followed so exclusively is the Christ who has made himself one with all humanity in its need: âIn Christâs incarnation all humanity regains the dignity of bearing the image of God.â8 This theme is followed up in the Ethics where it is now the world, of which Christ is the centre, that holds the attention; but the fact that Christ is the centre is never lost sight of.
As for the prison writings, Bonhoeffer himself certainly recognizes that he is taking a new turn in looking for a Christianity which is not a form of âreligionâ, in a world that no longer needs God as traditionally conceived (the God beyond us, the stopgap God who is brought in from another world and only when human powers give out). Yet here, where his personal situation is becoming so dire, so much of his earlier thought is fused anew into an affirmation of how the transcendent God is indeed to be apprehended in present experience: âExperience that here there is a reversal of all human existence, in the very fact that Jesus only âis there for othersâ.â9 The implication for the church is sharp: âGod is the beyond in the midst of our lives. The church stands not at the point where human powers fail, at the boundaries, but in the centre of the village.â10 God is not an escape from suffering but takes his place at the heart of the worldâs affliction. With Christ âone takes seriously no longer oneâs own sufferings but rather the suffering of God in the worldâ;11 âThe church is church only when it is there for others.â12
Vicarious representative action
We can be yet more specific about the continuity in Bonhoeffer. There is one term and concept which, more than any other, runs like a thread throughout his theology, and which is crucially significant for linking the life of the church and the life of society. We meet it f...