Bonhoeffer's dilemma.

• Author: Hindman, Caleb M.
• Position: Dietrich Bonhoeffer's theology of Christian duty when faced with tyranny

INTRODUCTION

Imagine a world where every member of a certain religious group is being systematically hunted down and murdered in unimaginable ways: they are being crucified, tied inside of an animal carcass and killed by dogs, and lit on fire to illuminate the night sky. (1) Now imagine that this entire persecution is being carried out because of the commands of a single man. How should one respond? What should one do? For Christians in the early Church, the answer was unanimous: they did not try to kill their persecutors. In fact, the persecutors gave the Christians a way to put an end to the suffering: all the Christians had to do was to "swear by the emperor and curse Christ [and they] would be free to go." (2) Even in the face of death, many of these Christians refused to deny Christ. At his trial, Bishop Polycarp, after being told he would be spared if he rejected Christ, bravely said, '"For eighty-six years I have served him, and he has done me no evil. How could I curse my king, who saved me?'" (3) Polycarp, like many other Christians, refused to reject Christ or fight against the tyrannous government and became martyred.

This paper uses the life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer to help explore the larger issue of what a Christian should do in the face of tyranny. Part I explores Bonhoeffer's life and theology, the latter of which changed over time. Part II discusses the teachings of Jesus, Peter, and Paul. Part III discusses the teachings of the early church fathers. Part IV addresses the later teachings of the Catholic Church, exemplified by Thomas Aquinas, and the thoughts of the early German Reformation, exemplified by Martin Luther. Part V presents some tentative conclusions about Bonhoeffer's dilemma in light of the teachings discussed in this paper. This paper shows that although Christ taught his followers to love their enemies and to pray for those who persecuted them, a Christian's duty will sometimes require him to act violently for the sake of others.

1. DIETRICH BONHOEFFER

   1. Bonhoeffer the Pacifist

      Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a German pastor of the Confessing Church during the 1930s and 40s who was faced with a dilemma somewhat like that faced by Christians in the early Church. Bonhoeffer became known for his emphasis on peace during the late 1930s with his sermons and his book, The Cost of Discipleship, (4) Bonhoeffer's pre-war The Cost of Discipleship; his writings during World War II, namely Ethics; and his essay, After Ten Years, serve as a great foundation for the overarching theological debate as to a Christian's duty in the face of tyranny and violence.

      In The Cost of Discipleship, Bonhoeffer maintains a completely pacifist theology. One of the foundational points of this theology comes from Jesus' teachings of The Beatitudes from the Sermon on the Mount. Bonhoeffer analyzes each Beatitude in critical detail.

      Bonhoeffer writes, quoting Jesus, '"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.'" (5) He then explains who the meek are: "This community of strangers possesses no inherent right of its own to protect its members in the world, nor do they claim such rights, for they are meek." (6) Bonhoeffer believes the meek must act peacefully when treated violently and must not "go to law" to defend their legal rights. (7) Instead, "[t]hey are determined to leave their rights to God alone." (8) This seems to go hand-in-hand with the Christian martyrs of the early Church, who refused to use violence to prevent their own persecution and death.

      Bonhoeffer next quotes another Beatitude of Jesus: '"Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called children of God.'" (9) Bonhoeffer acknowledges that this is an active calling, not a passive one, but he did not believe that peace should be made by using violence to stop the suffering. (10) Instead, Bonhoeffer believed that Christ's disciples should "keep the peace by choosing to endure suffering themselves rather than inflict it on others. They ... quietly suffer in the face of hatred and wrong. In so doing they overcome evil with good, and establish the peace of God in the midst of a world of war and hate." (11) Bonhoeffer's pacifist theology is clear here: he believes Christians should not be peacemakers of a sort that violently or aggressively stop attackers. Instead, Christians are to be peacemakers by enduring suffering.

      Bonhoeffer's pacifist theology is made explicit when he discusses the subject of revenge:

      The only way to overcome evil is to let it run itself to a standstill because it does not find the resistance it is looking for. Resistance merely creates further evil and adds fuel to the flames. But when evil meets no opposition and encounters no obstacle but only patient endurance, its sting is drawn, and at last it meets an opponent which is more than its match. (12) Bonhoeffer does not place conditions on when or for how long a Christian must patiently endure evil. Patient endurance of evil must continue for a Christian's entire life and in every circumstance: "There is no deed on earth so outrageous as to justify a different attitude." (13) He strongly condemns anyone who takes vengeance into his own hands, saying, "Christ died for me and for my enemies both. If I seek revenge, then I despise the other's salvation." (14)

      Bonhoeffer assaults the theology of those he refers to as the "Reformers," although it seems to be quite clear he is aiming his assault at Luther. (15) He accuses the Reformers of creating a dividing line between one's Christian life and their temporal life, saying that this division "is wholly alien to the teaching of Jesus." (16) Bonhoeffer ponders:

      [T]he precept of non-violence applies equally to private life and official duty. [Jesus] is the Lord of all life, and demands undivided allegiance. Furthermore, when it comes to practice, this distinction raises insoluble difficulties. Am I ever acting only as a private person or only in an official capacity? If I am attacked am I not at once the father of my children, the pastor of my flock, and e.g. a government official? Am 1 not bound for that very reason to defend myself against every attack, for reason of responsibility to my office? And am I not also always an individual, face to face with Jesus, even in the performance of my official duties? Am I not therefore obliged to resist every attack just because of my responsibility for my office? Is it right to forget that the follower of Jesus is always utterly alone, always the individual, who in the last resort can only decide and act for himself? ... Is then the demand of Jesus nothing but an impractical ideal? (17) Bonhoeffer thus believed that a Christian must act like Christ in every aspect of life, both in private, with family, and in an official capacity. Bonhoeffer accuses the Reformers, who believed Christians were only called to act like Christ in private but succumb to the necessities of the "real" world when acting for others, of walking along a dangerous slippery slope: could a person ever act only as a private person? Officials are still officials when they are alone; fathers are still fathers when they are alone. Thus, according to Bonhoeffer, to require Christians to act a certain way, but only "in private," would necessarily lead Christians to think of Jesus' teachings as nothing but impractical ideals, rather than actual commands to be carried out daily.

      Finally, Bonhoeffer discusses how Christians should respond to their enemies. Again, advocating a theology of nonresistance, Bonhoeffer cites Christ as the ultimate example of nonviolence. Bonhoeffer states that in Matthew 5:43-48, Christians are called to love their enemies in uncompromising terms. (18) Bonhoeffer reminds his readers that the disciples themselves were reminded that they were Christ's enemies when they faced the cross, for he bore the cross for their sins. (19) Not only were the disciples once enemies of Christ, but every Christian was once God's enemy. (20) Christians are called to love every single person, including their enemies, just as God loved them when they were His enemy. "Or," Bonhoeffer asks, "are we of the opinion that God loves us more than God loves our enemies: Would we believe that we are God's favorite children? ... Is God's love any less for our enemies, for whom God just as much came, suffered, and died, as God did for us?" (21)

   2. Bonhoeffer the Conspirator

      Bonhoeffer's theology of peace was challenged after Adolf Hitler rose to power in Germany. In 1929, before World War II began, Hitler began planning the first of his many schemes to make Germany great again, the first scheme being to "remove" the "weakest" Germans. (22) This plan, known as the T-4 euthanasia program, was carried out in 1939. (23) During that year, the German government began requiring all children born with genetic birth defects to be registered with the state. (24) After the war began, five thousand of these "incurable" children would be murdered. (25)

      Although Bonhoeffer pushed for political resistance at the start of the war, he soon began to believe he had to do more. (26) Bonhoeffer's friend, Eberhard Bethge, explained the paradox Bonhoeffer faced:

      Bonhoeffer introduced us in 1935 to the problem of what we today call political resistance. The levels of confession and of resistance could no longer be kept neatly apart. The escalating persecution of the Jews generated an increasingly intolerable situation, especially for Bonhoeffer himself. We now realized that mere confession, no matter how courageous, inescapably meant complicity with the murderers, even though there would always be new acts of refusing to be co-opted and even though we would preach "Christ alone" Sunday after Sunday. During the whole time the Nazi state never considered it necessary to prohibit such preaching. Why should it? Thus we were approaching the borderline between confession and resistance; and if we did not cross this border, our confession was...