Politics and Religion

-
Germany 1932
Politics in Germany mid 1932 were starting to get out of hand. In June Bruning resigned and Franz von Papen became Reich chancellor. “Many Germans expected the new Christian conservative government to restore stability.” At 26, Bonhoeffer preached “against Papan government’s misuse of God’s name:

We read that a government has proclaimed that a whole nation is to be saved from collapse--by the Christian worldview. So we, individually and as a nation, are escaping from an inconceivable final catastrophe. 'In the name of God, amen,' is again to be the slogan, religion is again to be cultivated, and the Christian view of life is to be spread. How very meager, weak and pitiful it all sounds: do we believe that we will truly let ourselves be taken in by this 'In the name of God, amen'? That all our actions shall be governed by it? That we, rich and poor, Germans and French, will allow ourselves to be united by the name of God? Or is there not concealed behind our religious trends our ungovernable urge toward...power--in the name of God to do what we want, and in the name of the Christian worldview to stir up and play off one people against another?...Our disobedience is not that we are so irreligious, but that we are so very glad to be religious...very relieved when some government proclaims the Christian worldview...so that the more pious we are, the less we let ourselves be told that God is dangerous, that God will not be mocked."
How much this applies to so much that calls itself religious or Christian in our nation. In the name of God to do what we want … this is a struggle from small to big, from parent to pastor to president.

I am constantly amazed at how clearly and early Bonhoeffer saw these things. It seems from Bethge’s biography that the whole Bonhoeffer family was clear of what was going on and the danger ahead.

At this point in Bonhoeffer’s life where he is working in the academy, the church and in echumenical gatherings like World Alliance. Bonhoeffer saw in these echumenical gatherings a chance for the church to speak with a unified voice against the trouble coming. Some of the early gatherings discussed disarmaments. At this point, Bonhoeffer is struggling, but hopeful that the gatherings will speak out …

It is here, one of the things he says to these gatherings, that is a question, begs a question. In one meeting he is part of one of four discussion groups. His group issued a report saying:
the church must formulate very precise demands in the name of Jesus, no generalities; judgement has to be pronounced on capitalism and nationalism …

“Very precise demands” this is something that the more progessive, for lack of a better word, among us hang back from … and for what seems like very good reason. After any amount of investigation into life, especially if an attempt is made at “open-mindedness”, it is easy to admit how complex the world is and any given situation. Perhaps there are things that are clear, certain morals, but many that are not.

But what if you are in a nation that is about to take bloody, fatal steps toward revenge and world conquest, among other things. What if you see a rising tide of ugly authority, say a leader who likes to shout and carries a horse whip everywhere he goes? Is it best to remain “open-minded”, to realize that life is complex and it is difficult to state right and wrong?

Towards the end of 1932, Bonhoeffer writes it this way:
The church must be able to say the Word of God, the word of authority, here and now, in the most concrete way possible, from knowledge of the situation, or it will say something else, something different and human, the word of impotence. Thus the church must announce no eternally valid principles, but only commandments that are true today. For what is “always” true is not true “today.” To us God is “always” God “today.”
Bonhoeffer, to some extent, that things in Germany were about to head down a dangerous path. And he thought the church should say something, something concrete. This is where the question comes to me. I feel like, to some extent, it is the Christian right, again labels suck, but it saves a lot of time to just name-call, who would say, exactly. That is why Focus on the Family James Dobson wrote a scary letter from the future about what America would be like under Obama-socialism. BUT, wasn’t Bonhoeffer’s sermon quoted in the beginning a strong rebuke of just these kind of groups?

There is a great danger with “eternally valid principles” and there is a great need of “concrete way”s but I think it takes a lot more work to arrive at these and to do so day by day.

January 30, 1933
“A forest of swastika flags surrounded the alter of Magdeburg Cathedral. The cathedral dean Ernst Martin interpreted the scene from the pulpit with words similar to those used by many other church leaders:
It has simply become the symbol of German hope. Whoever reviles this symbol is reviling our Germany... The swastika flags round the altar radiate hope--hope that the day is at last about to dawn.
In the first sermon Bonhoeffer preached in the Trinity Church in Berlin after Hitler’s seizure of power. He announced:
The church has only one altar, the altar of the Almighty … before which all creatures must kneel... Whoever seeks something other than this must keep away; he cannot join us in the house of God... The church has only one pulpit, and from that pulpit, faith in God will be preached, and no other faith, and no other will than the will of God, however well-intentioned.

Bonhoeffer is a very bold man for 26 and it is amazing how clearly he sees what is happening. I hope to develop some of that sight. Father give us bright and open eyes.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I too admire his boldness and his ability while in difficulty to have clarity. Clarity afterwards is much easier but clarity while in it is rare. I assume it comes from knowing and living God's way. it would see so. Thanks for the inspiring writing. blessings, dad
June 29, 2013 at 5:44 PM
Matt said…
He really was prophetic. He seemed to have the ability to get through all the noise right to the real issue. I think in his discussion of the need for the church to make concrete pronouncements we see again the extent to which Bonhoeffer is a Rorschach test for believers of all stripes: You see Dobson and the Religious Right as analogous to the usurpers of God's name that Bonhoeffer condemned. Yet I suspect that Dobson and his followers would have cheered those quotations just as heartily and seen themselves on his side - i.e. making the needed concrete pronouncements for our day (while liberal Christians abet the degradation of culture under the banner of Christian compassion). In the end, it seems, there are Christians on all sides who now confidently make "very precise demands"; the question is which demands we believe to be valid...
July 3, 2013 at 9:42 AM
jaypercival said…
Yes, that is what I was thinking too. My sentence is difficult (horribly written) but you have it: Dobson agrees with Bonhoeffer's statement about concrete actions and precise demands and so is acting and writing from the basis. And then yes, are the demands valid? Are they the prophetic word to the wayward nation or are they enthusiastic support of the party who panders to their vote with religious language?

The kind of raw power grab that was taking place at this time (1933) in Germany doesn't seem to have any comparison to parties today in the US ... but the question is how do we articulate the "precise demands" without falling for the red herring?
July 8, 2013 at 10:42 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Hearth

-
Image
"A stove used to furnish more than mere warmth. It was a focus, a hearth, a place that gathered the work and leisure of a family and gave the house a center. Its coldness marked the morning, and the spreading of its warmth the beginning of the day. It assigned to the different family members tasks that defined their place in the household. The mother built the fire, the children kept the firebox filled, and the father cut the firewood. It provided for the entire family a regular and bodily engagement with the rhythm of the seasons that was woven together of the threat of cold and solace of warmth, the smell of wood smoke, the exertion of sawing and of carrying, the teaching of skills and the fidelity to daily tasks." (Albert Borgmann: Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life ) So what is our new center? Warmth is now provided in a completely uniform way requiring no demands on our skill, strength or attention. In fact, the warmth device (central heating system) is c...
Read more

Idolatry in the West

-
"in order to promote killing in civilized societies it must be legalized under deceitful names. Yet liberal societies seem happy to be deceived exactly to the degree to which they have developed into societies of covetousness." Ok ... I know you need more before you know where this is going ... I am reading a book of essays on the ten commandments. This is in a section talking about the relatedness of all ten commandments, primarily through the command not to murder. He goes from there to make the point that we are a society dominated by want and covetousness and the more the claws of greed entangle us (from human traffiking to slave labor for our cheap consumer goods, to "designer babies" and whatever else technology deems to sell) the more we will redefine sin and morality. Bernd Wannenwetsch continues: "the culture of death is essentially marked by the business of redefinition. In defining our own humanity we claim the property rights that entitle us to dist...
Read more