Attacks on Christendom in a World Come of Age

Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer, and the Question of "Religionless Christianity"

Matthew D. Kirkpatrick

• Publisher: Pickwick Publications
• Year: 2011
• Print ISBN:
  9781608995509
  9781498256780
• eBook ISBN:
  9781621890669
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Church

Though Soren Kierkegaard and Dietrich Bonhoeffer both made considerable contributions to twentieth-century thought, they are rarely considered together. Against Kierkegaard's melancholic individual, Bonhoeffer stands as the champion of the church and community. In Attacks on Christendom, Matthew D. Kirkpatrick challenges these stereotypical readings of these two vital thinkers. Through an analysis of such concepts as epistemology, ethics, Christology, and ecclesiology, Kirkpatrick reveals Kierkegaard's significant influence on Bonhoeffer throughout his work. Kirkpatrick shows that Kierkegaard underlies not only Bonhoeffer's spirituality but also his concepts of knowledge, being, and community. So important is this relationship that it was through Kierkegaard's powerful representation of Abraham and Isaac that Bonhoeffer came to adhere to an ethic that led to his involvement in the assassination attempts against Hitler. However, this relationship is by no means one-sided. Attacks on Christendom argues for the importance of Bonhoeffer as an interpreter of Kierkegaard, drawing Kierkegaard's thought into his own unique context, forcing Kierkegaard to answer very different questions. Bonhoeffer helps in converting the obscure, obdurate Dane into a thinker for his own, unique age. Both Kierkegaard and Bonhoeffer have been criticized and misunderstood for their final works that lay bare the religious climates of their nations. In the final analysis, Attacks on Christendom argues that these works are not unfortunate endings to their careers, but rather their fulfilment, drawing together the themes that had been brewing throughout their work.

1

Introduction

In yet a little while

I shall have won;

Then the whole fight

Will at once be done.

Then I may rest

In bowers of roses

And unceasingly, unceasingly

Speak with my Jesus.1

Kierkegaard, Bonhoeffer, and the Problem of Influence

Kierkegaard’s influence on Bonhoeffer has been widely recognized by specialists of both authors. Indeed, near the beginning of his authorship Bonhoeffer twice described his own academic lineage, standing “in the tradition of Paul, Luther, Kierkegaard, in the tradition of genuine Christian thinking.”2 And yet this recognition has occurred exclusively in footnotes, digressions, and the occasional paper. No comprehensive study has been conducted thus far.3 Furthermore, the little scholarship that does exist has been plagued by several stereotypes. First, discussion is often limited to an analysis of Bonhoeffer’s Discipleship. Second, Kierkegaard has been identified as an individualist and acosmist who rejected the church. This has lead many to consider Bonhoeffer, the ecumenist and ecclesiologist, as selectively agreeing with Kierkegaard, but ultimately rejecting his overall stance. I will argue that neither stereotype is true. Rather I will show that Kierkegaard’s influence can be found throughout Bonhoeffer’s work and that, although a more stereotypical perspective may be present in SC, by the end of his life Bonhoeffer had gained a far deeper understanding across the breadth of Kierkegaard’s work.

Before beginning, I should add a certain disclaimer. The concept of “influence” is itself deeply problematic. Without an author’s direct and explicit declaration, discerning influences must remain extremely speculative. It is not simply a matter of establishing a direct relationship, which is itself a challenge. One must contend with a whole web of possible relationships and influences. One must ask whether Bonhoeffer received Kierkegaard directly, or through other “Kierkegaardian” writers such as Barth, Bultmann, and Tillich. If Bonhoeffer did read Kierkegaard directly, was he reading through the interpretation of others or the stereotypes of the day? Furthermore, when Bonhoeffer and Kierkegaard were heavily influenced not only by Paul and Luther, but also a Herrnhut background, one needs to consider how much is direct influence and how much simply similarity.4

A further layer of obscurity arises in the reactions of an author to his influences. In his seminal work, The Anxiety of Influence, Harold Bloom suggests the potentially Freudian relationship a son has to his intellectual father(s), desiring above all else to break free and establish his own originality and, ultimately, his own self. Bloom suggests that its most common manifestation is in the son’s denial or omission of the father’s work from his own, mentioning him only by way of critique.

Given the limited nature of the secondary sources and the problems of influence, this work has a lot to overcome. Before looking at the primary sources themselves, I will begin by setting the scene. This will include a summary of the scholarship thus far, an examination of the evidence for Bonhoeffer’s direct relationship to Kierkegaard, and an overview of the Kierkegaardian climate in which Bonhoeffer found himself.

Secondary Sources

References

A number of works discuss Kierkegaard and Bonhoeffer together without addressing their relationship to one another. As both were confirmed Lutherans who undertook a strong social and ecclesiological critique, it isn’t surprising that they should be used as foils and comparisons for each other. For instance, in his overview of Bonhoeffer’s work, André Dumas dedicates a chapter to the comparison of Discipleship and LT to a number of Kierkegaard’s later works. Likewise, in Beyond Religion, Daniel Jenkins uses both Bonhoeffer and Kierkegaard as primary sources in developing his ideas on religion.

A comparison is equally used from the perspective of Kierkegaardian scholarship in relation to Kierkegaard’s later works. Consequently, the International Kierkegaard Commentary on FSE and JFY contains two articles, by David Law and Murray Rae, which contrast Kierkegaard’s ideas with Bonhoeffer’s concepts of “discipleship” and “cheap grace,” as well as his attack on Christendom. Indeed, both here and in his later article, “Kierkegaard’s Anti-Ecclesiology,” Law comes out strongly in favor of Bonhoeffer against what he perceives to be Kierkegaard’s Gnostic form of Christianity. Vernard Eller, in his pietist interpretation of Kierkegaard, also makes the comparison without the connection. This is particularly surprising as he entitles two of his chapters “Religionlessness” and “Nachfolge” respectively, mentioning Bonhoeffer only enough to criticize his attack on Christendom as inconsistent in its claim to hold both religiousness and a high ecclesiology.5 Similarly, Craig Hinkson describes Kierkegaard’s attack on Luther’s followers as having adopted “cheap grace,” but does not make any reference to Bonhoeffer.6 Stacey Ake has also written on the comparison of Kierkegaard and Bonhoeffer’s more aesthetic thoughts, without making an explicit link.

From the Kierkegaardian side the link is explicitly, if briefly, made. In his above-mentioned article, Murray suggests that Bonhoeffer moved towards Kierkegaard where Barth ultimately moved away. In his analysis of Kierkegaard’s attack on Christendom, John Elrod also makes the connection. However, his argument is somewhat undermined in suggesting that Kierkegaard influenced the young German pastors, including Barth and Bonhoeffer, who wrote the Barmen declaration.7

Explicit Discussions

A handful of commentators have sought to highlight Bonhoeffer’s use of Kierkegaard beyond these footnotes and allusions, presented here in chronological order.

Wenzel Lohff

The first recognizable attempt occurs in a short article from 1963, entitled “Justification and Ethics,” by Wenzel Lohff. Lohff’s argument is tangential, drawing on Kierkegaard in the last few paragraphs to argue that where the systematization of justification might breed moral laxness, so this was overcome through Kierkegaard, whose work “became effective, in different ways, especially through the early work of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.”8 However, Lohff’s analysis extends no further than four cross-references in the footnotes concerning “cheap grace,” the true nature of grace as the “result” of faith rather than its presupposition, and the need for “imitation.”

Heinrich Traugott Vogel

Following Lohff’s cursory attempt, Vogel is perhaps the first to offer a serious analysis of the relationship. And yet even here it occurs in a short appendix, entitled “Traces of Kierkegaard in Bonhoeffer’s Discipleship,” at the end of his doctoral thesis.

Although his focus is clearly Discipleship, Vogel argues that at the beginning of Bonhoeffer’s authorship, “Kierkegaard was well known to him at that time, and his relationship to the developing contemporary situation.”9 Specifically, he suggests that Bonhoeffer’s critique of idealism in SC “is recognizably parallel” to Kierkegaard’s, but in the place of Kierkegaard’s “rejection of the idea of the church,” Bonhoeffer uses “the I-Thou school of thought” to establish the community.10

Turning to Discipleship, Vogel briefly discusses Bonhoeffer’s description of the movements of faith, the need for a “first step” on the part of the individual, and so the reversal of the Lutheran conception of works following on from faith. Vogel argues that Bonhoeffer’s argument is decidedly weak on this point as he is not so much thinking for himself but injecting Kierkegaard’s argument into his.11

From a textual analysis (Bonhoeffer’s library was not available to him) Vogel argues that there are strong similarities bet...

Table of contents

• Attacks on Christendom in a World Come of Age
• Foreword
• Acknowledgments
• Abbreviations
• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: 1848 and All That
• Chapter 3: Bonhoeffer and the German Volk
• Chapter 4: Attack on Idealism—Epistemology
• Chapter 5: Attack on Idealism—Ethics
• Chapter 6: Attack on Idealism—Christology and Discipleship
• Chapter 7: Attack on Christendom
• Chapter 8: Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Index of Names
• Subject Index