Book Review of Dietrich Bonhoeffers Ethics

Joshua Gale

October 2012

Page 2 After stating brief distinction between the tasks of Christian ethics and secular ethics, Dietrich Bonhoeffer writes, Christian ethics discerns a falling away from the origin. 1 Bonhoeffer insists that, the first task of Christian ethics is to invalidate this knowledge of good and evil[which] seems to be the aim of all ethical reflection.2 Being one with God, that is the aim of Christian ethics for this knowledge of good and evil, or, as Bonhoeffer writes, the concept of the moral and immoral, valuable and valueless or of actual or proper being and not actual or proper being only signifies our separation from God. It is through this knowledge that humanity has further turned its back to God and embraced what can be proven by human means; that is by process or procedure, or by law, or by science, or by systematics. As God says in the book of Genesis, The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. 3 To worry ones self with these things means to remove God from the Judgment seat and to take his place instead. In concern with Christian ethics, Bonhoeffer bases the heart of his arguments upon two main events, that which is referred to as the Fall and the incarnation of God through Christ. It is in these events that we find substance to his writing and in these events that Bonhoeffer fully discerns what he believes to be Gods relationship to that of the world, in which Bonhoeffer truly finds his grounding and emphasizes throughout the book. This juxtaposition between man and God becomes the life stream of his critiques about the church, patriotism, morality, faith, and what purposes these things have served

Quoted in Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics, (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1955), 21. 2 Quoted in Ethics, 21 3 Gn. 3:22 (NIV)
1

Page 3 through history. It is our disunion with God that Bonhoeffer interests himself in and explores in his book Ethics. Instead of knowing himself solely in the reality of being chosen and loved by God, he must now know himself in the possibility of choosing and of being in the origin of good and evilbecause he acquires this knowledge only at the price of estrangement from the origin, the good and evil that he knows are not the good and evil of God but the good and evil against God. 4 This, according to Bonhoeffer, is the root of the problem. In the invalidation of this knowledge of good and evil, one must look to the source of humanity, its origin. Through the devils deceit, man sinned and became self-aware, displacing himself away from his true origin. At our core we know one reality, and that reality is God. To be anchored in origins is to be anchored in God. In this awareness that we have come to know outside of God, in this becoming like God, man has become a god against God. 5 Bonhoeffer uses the example of the Pharisee to further illustrate this point, stating that he thought the Pharisee to be a man solely concerned with this knowledge of good and evil. Everyday at any point in time the Pharisee becomes concerned with more than that of God, and instead focuses attention on laws, procedures, and rituals. This is the epitome of a man being at odds with God, relying upon his humanistic intuitions to guide transform his faith and to, ultimately, lead to his salvation. It is this such topic that and in this context that Christ tells us the story of the good Samaritan and offers to us the greatest commandment, Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your

4 5

Quoted in Ethics, 23 Quoted in Ethics, 23.

Page 4 soul and with all your mind. 6 The death of the Pharisees is that they had become blind to the will of God and could no longer distinguish the difference between that will of God and the will of man. To be in the center of the will of God, Bonhoeffer says, is the only way to truly overcome the disunion of man in good and evil. To be in the center of the will of God means that at point of conflict in ones life, there is no actual decision to be made because Gods reality is our one true reality. It is from Gods will that Christ gained his confidence and it is from there that our origin is recovered. This will, which is proved by the renewing of ones mind, may remain at the bottom of an array of potential circumstances. It is important that one not confuse the will of God with a matter of the heart, yet it is also important the note the ever-changing quality of Gods will. The will of God is not a system of rules which is established from the outset; it something new and different in each different situation in lifefor this reason there arises every day anew the question how here, today and in my present situation I am to remain and to be preserved in this new life with God, with Jesus Christ. 7 Perhaps to better understand the will of God by explaining where it is not, Bonhoeffer further clarifies that when outside the will of God, where shame lives as Christians have invented it, we pick up masks. These masks that cover our shame are necessary signs of our disunion with God, and for that reason they must be respected. The covering of shame conceals everything nascent that proceeds from the mans

6 7

Mt. 22: 37 (NIV) Quoted in Ethics, 41, 43.

Page 5 yearning for the reattainment of the unity which he has lost. 8 Not to be confused with remorse, to feel sorry, or embarrassment, shame is more original than both of those, which is why the removal of such masks, exposing such shame, a man is left bare before God, just as he once was at his origin. This is the purpose of Christ, to merge the scars and memories of the past with a future secured in the salvation of Christ in one present moment. This second significant event on which Bonhoeffer places so much emphasis now comes to surface. The disrobed man who rests naked without God is one that humanity cannot bare, for it was who God breathed life into the soil and created man; the nakedness of man is the death of man, and also his moment of salvation. When God was incarnated through Christ, God became married to humanity. The God man, who found no shelter in the worldunder whose protection [the naked] now seek sanctuary, and who thereby for the first time displays the full extent of His power, 9 the power of the cross. This, the body of Christ, says Bonhoeffer, is the point of departure for Christian ethics. At the hardened point of this departure comes the redemptive mediator between lost and found, of death and revival, which is grace. The salvific charge of grace that allows man to lose his balance and to even yet again regain his momentum centralizes all of Bonhoeffers discussions of God and man, union and disunion, and natural and unnatural. The gravity of the subject is weighted so heavily that grace, through Gods connection with the world, which is through Christ, is like the honey of a hive, without it Bonhoeffers arguments would be void. In fact, Bonhoeffer states that, The world is
8 9

Quoted in Ethics, 26. Quoted in Ethics, 61.

Page 6 thus the sphere of concrete responsibility which is given to us in and through Jesus Christones task is not to turn the world upside-down, but to do what is necessary at the given place with a due consideration of reality. 10 Because of Gods prevenient grace, because of Christs already outstretched hands, one can come to know of God and Gods will for his life. Guilt is the foremost way in which one is spurred towards this grace and must be recognized as a complete defection from Christ. This grace, though, must not be cheap, an end without the means. As much as Bonhoeffer emphasizes the redemptive qualities of this grace, he thinks it to be even more important that something precede grace, something penultimate. Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline. Communion without confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ.11 This penultimate thing before the last is what allows one to accept the grace that Christ has to offer. Incurred guilt, a contrite heart, or a broken spirit presupposes it. The justification that is found through Christ requires something of us, something such as faith. In this way, it is by, both, faith and grace each alone that one is justified. Faith means being held captive by the sight of Jesus Christ, no longer seeing anything but himbeing set free by Jesus Christ 12 Faith, accomplished by love and hope, is the foundation that leads the way to grace. As one is responsible for all that ensues his initial journey of faith, it is in his immediate context and state of reality that one will find the Quoted in Ethics, 229, 230. Quoted in Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship, (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1966). 12 Quoted in Ethics, 121.
10 11

Page 7 ultimate, which is grace. It is in this way that both faith and grace are dependent upon one another yet remain separate. In Bonhoeffers theology, an emphasis is placed upon reality, which is the one reality of God, as opposed to an emphasis upon the divine. This means coming from the perspective that Christs incarnation leveled the playing field, not because men became holier but because God became part of the world. The ethical implications of Christianity when approached in this way require that one naturally progress to the next step that is questioning the balance and unity between man and God. Bonhoeffer poses that one must stop thinking of each of these things in this way, as if they are all separate from one another. There are not two realities, but only one reality, and that is the reality of God, which has become manifest in Christ in the reality of the world. 13 Through Christ, we stand in both the reality of God and the reality of the world, with Christ being able to encompass both God and the world. Henceforth, it is important that we articulate this relationship that is of Christ and the world, Christ and the church as one, as this becomes the soul of Bonhoeffers writings. In this expression of Bonhoeffers approach to the church, and to the state, it is of the utmost importance that one understands his cultural context. Through this lens one may better understand the circumstances in which Bonhoeffer is writing and, too, that one may understand more fully the realistic and theological extent of his written expressions. If one is to remove himself from the metaphysics of Bonhoeffers theology and launch into a pursuit of application, he should begin in this same way, by examining the framework of which Bonhoeffer was working. This requires a basic understanding of

13

Quoted in Ethics, 195.

Page 8 world history, his own personal background, and his work amongst other theologians working with and around him. In the best interest of connecting his thoughts on the church, as stated in his book Ethics, to his own stitch in the course of all time, an analysis of only the most significant aspects will follow. A close study of Bonhoeffers early family life may answer many questions concerning his interest of church in the world. Growing up in a large family in Breslau, Germany in the early twentieth century, he became the only one interested in theology. His twin sister, Sabine, stated this in explaining the character of their father, an extremely accomplished psychiatrist, Sometimes papa delighted in making us define concepts, or things, and if we managed to do so clearly, without being vague, he was happyhe was abled to watch and wait for [our ideas] to grow. 14 Growing up in such a setting, where Bonhoeffer was so strongly encouraged to embrace and articulate his knowledge of science, must have had lasting effects, as his theology, especially concerning that of metaphysics and its relation to the natural, reads almost as psychological field study does. It is in this type of home, that Bonhoeffer was brought up to interpret the world, and from there began his education in the field of theology. The polity of the church by the early-mid twentieth century had become interwoven with that of the government. It is about this subject that one will read some of Bonhoeffers most heated texts. The church compromised its position as a staple in society of whose job it is to assess the ethical state of a government in order to become powerful in a way that would benefit itself. Fully understanding the sensitivity of the relationship between church and state, Bonhoeffer made it an ambition to salvage what Quoted in Eberhard Bethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer A Biography, (First Forest Press edition, 2000), 15.
14

Page 9 little integrity of the church that he thought was left and to embrace again the holy and divinely just. 15 Not to assume that he is limited to immediate circumstances, but when he writes systematically his theology of church and state, it would be ignorant to the most extreme degree to overlook this important detail of his life as it relates to its place and time in history. As any social scientist would agree, in order to properly interpret Bonhoeffers epistemic response one must look at his contextual influences. Of those influences, Karl Barth is one that cannot be looked over as Bonhoeffer felt that Barth could be a mentor of sorts whose theological direction remained within his orbit. Both theologians faced many of the same issues, absorbing the ideas of liberal theology and by finding different ways to deal with it. Theologically, Bonhoeffer and Barth ran along with one another, not crossing paths too often. It is, once again, in their unique social contexts that they differed from one another, and it could be argued that it is ultimately this such difference that led each of them down two very simply, yet still distinctly unique, paths. Barth, of Switzerlands, life was intertwined with Germany, but he was always an outsider who spoke with a strange accent[but] his advantage was that he could always leave. 16 In contrast, Bonhoeffer was born and raised German, living the bourgeoisie life and developed a deep loyalty to the state of his country.

A pastor of the Confessing church, who was clearly concerned with an inner struggle with what had been happening to the church, wrote this in a letter to Bonhoeffer asking for guidance. As quoted in Dietrich Bonhoeffer A Biography, I keep on having doubts whether we young pastors of the Confessing church are taking a course that is right and necessary. After all, there are indications that after the war, and to some extent even now, we shall be deprived of every possibility of a ministryDont those of us who were examined by the confessing church resembled the shock troops cut off from the main unit, who are gradually becoming casualties...Is this path we are following necessary? 16 John D. Godsey, Barth and Bonhoeffer: The Basic Difference, (Quarterly Review 7, no. 1, Spring 1987).
15

Page 10 For when Bonhoeffer makes the statement that, what is nearest to God is precisely the need of ones neighborto provide the hungry man with bread is to prepare the way for coming of grace, 17 he is speaking from a theology of community, where one must depend upon another, but as he saw in the Germany of the 1940s, this concept was broken. No longer did he feel that the church was serving to fulfill the needs of humanity, but instead it had begun serving the needs of its institutional self. Bonhoeffers uncanny ability to relate his Christological theology to each and every scenario becomes a go-to validation of any critique of the church or of the self. In relation to the church, he states that the power of the Church is in that it is a place in society of which Christ has taken form. The complete form of Christ manifests itself through the church, and to rob the church of its Christ is to rob the church of its power, and in this loss of power it once again finds its true self through the recognition of guilt. Bonhoeffer strikes at the heart of this issue by writing with extreme empathy and a dose of frustration a confession of the church. As Christ took upon himself the guilt and sins of entire world on the cross and buried them, so does the church through its confession. This brings upon itself the weight of the guilt of the world, which falls upon the shoulders of Christians who deny the guilt its power through this confession, and ultimately lends itself to forgiveness. In this moving portion of the book, Bonhoeffers heart for the Church spills out upon the pages, and like a long awaited confrontation amongst two parties, the air, still tense, releases itself gradually of its pressure and Bonhoeffer is once again available to further lend himself to his original theme; ethics. With a sense of conclusion of the matter, he writes that, Either the Church must

17

Quoted in Ethics, 136.

Page 11 willingly undergo this transformation, or else she must cease to be the Church of Christ,
18

and starts the healing process with, The Church and the individual are sentenced in

their guilt and as such they are justified by Him who takes upon Himself all human guilt and forgives it, by Jesus Christ. 19 It is in this place where one becomes aware that as frustrated with the Church it appears Bonhoeffer may be, he has a realization that it is still his responsibility, under the authority of Christ, to remain a part of it. 20 I am challenged by Bonhoeffers Ethics on a multitude of levels. From the first paragraph, which focuses on the idea of invalidating the knowledge of good and evil, placing from the very beginning secular ethics at odds with Christian ethics, my perception of ethics, morality, justice, and a plethora of other notions were plucked up from where they comfortably rested and were put to a fire. It is from that moment forward, from recognizing God as the true origin, that Bonhoeffer focuses quite heavily the significance of Gods presence in our lives; how important it is that we remain in the center of Gods will, and that there is no alternate reality outside of that will. He carries this concept well throughout the text and continuously falls back on that realization of Christ to base is arguments upon. After completing this book, my perception of Christ was not quite changed, but I did find myself always at comfort whenever the center of it all kept revolving back to find its reliance on the shoulders of Gods marriage to the world through Christ.

Quoted in Ethics, 116. Ibid. 20 Though Bonhoeffers realization was one that he must be an active member of the Church, his role remained as one that acted as an active critic. According to Bethge, when Bonhoeffer was asked what he wished he would have done differently had he gotten a chance to redo his last four to six months of freedom, he replied that he wished he had preached more and taught more theology.
18 19

Page 12 Though Bonhoeffers points are well developed and deeply appreciated most of the time, there are moments when the book feels unpolished, which is understandable considering he was never able to finish it. The most obvious and extreme of such circumstances are those where chapters are left incomplete. Upon reading the editors notes I sometimes found myself asking for just a little more, wondering how Bonhoeffer would tie in all his proposed ideas, written as notes. The strength of his writings is in his critical approach to not only past concepts and ideas but to his present experience as well. He is able to look to his surroundings and, literally, in the midst of war is able to develop a systematic theology that his quite strongly developed. His solution was in his activism, and it is clear that he was still working through some of his theological concepts as they were at times at odds with actions he felt so securely about. For instance, Bonhoeffers legacy will always be in that he was martyred in Germany as a political activist who withheld information from the government in a plotted attempt to assassinate Hitler. Bonhoeffers justification of this act comes out of chapter III of his book when it says early on that, What is worse than doing evil is being evilif evil appears in the form of light[then this] is a clear proof of its abysmal wickedness. 21 This, he says, is downfall of the moral theorist who cannot justify even the murder of a tyrant. He goes on to say later that, The destruction of the life of another may be undertaken only on the basis of an unconditional necessity 22 which is succeeded shortly thereafter by, In the sight of God there is no life that is not worth living; for life itself is valued by God. The fact that God is the Creator, Preserver and

21 22

Quoted in Ethics, 67. Quoted in Ethics, 159.

Page 13 Redeemer of life makes even the most wretched life worth living before God. 23 When read next to each other in such a way, it is hard to say that Bonhoeffer had fully worked through his murderous convictions. What is most unfortunate about this is that when one comes to Bonhoeffer looking for his justification of a murder, even when faced with tyranny, it just is not fully developed. Finally, though served well, his description of the necessity of simplicity comes to the reader as a slightly ironic glass of water; ironic, because it requires a lengthy explanation to get to the point that simplicity is what is required. When simplicity is combined with wisdom, one has all the weapons he needs to thwart off any attacks the Deceiver has in store for him. This works in opposition against ones dependence upon ones reason, moral fanaticism, conscience, duty, or private virtuousness to win against the Enemy. Bonhoeffer says that those who are using such ideals are fighting with rusty swords, swords that once served our fathers well to perform great feats but must be replaced with sharp ones. To be simple, Bonhoeffer says, is to fix ones eye solely on the simple truth of God at a time when all concepts are being confused, distorted and turned upside downnot fettered by principles, but bound by love for God. Mans Fall from his origin is the largest tragedy in the history of time. His acceptance of the knowledge of good and evil is his acceptance of shame and of guilt, and because of this he would wear a mask throughout the course of time, unable to see his true origin. He has disconnected himself from the Source and has tried instead to power up himself, turning away from God and turning into his self to create cosmos out of chaos. Bonhoeffers Ethics recognizes this from the very beginning. This concept is

23

Quoted in Ethics, 162.

Page 14 fleshed out early on in the book, feeling more polished than any other section. Though it is clear that he was still working through various theological themes, some created by his self and some of others, he writes most clearly and convincingly about the distinction of Christian ethics as it parallels secular ethics. Perhaps it is the tragedy of Bonhoeffers death that lures one in to read of his theology, or, say, to take a class about him, but it is his heart for humanity and for the church as it relates to Gods manifestation of Christ that one is convinced he must wrestle long and hard with. My expectations of his book were met and exceeded. Though I am sure that this is apparent in my writing about the book, it is clear to me that Bonhoeffer still had a lot of things that he was still dealing with and working through. The true tragedy of Bonhoeffer is in his early death, not so much of because of the simple fact that he died, but because I think it would have been very interesting to see his writings as he had gotten older. He still has a young mans convictions in his writings, the zeal of someone who is confident and ready to change the world, that makes me wonder how those convictions would have played out over time. What most amazes me about Bonhoeffer is his focus in a time of such turmoil and distress. As Barth, for instance, would read the papers and listen to the news reports on the radio about the war and all that was happening in Germany, Bonhoeffer was there. The bombs were falling around Bonhoeffer and his family. The war was personal for him, but even still he was able to reason through his convictions for a long enough time to write a systematic theology that is well grounded and not fully directed by emotions. I believe that this is partially how developed his theology of the will of God, because had he not been following Gods will, why else would he have found himself adamantly

Page 15 opposing Hitlers regime and the integrity of the church? This is a question he must have asked himself and asked it quite often, for he essentially chose to be in prison by continuing to withhold information and by not flexing to the wishes of the Gestapo. His willingness to hold strong and stand firm on principles feeds into my fighting spirit and encourages me to continue my pursuit of Christ in the community around me and within myself.

Page 16 Eberhard Bethge, Dietrich Bonhoeffer A Biography, (First Forest Press edition, 2000). Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics, (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1955). Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship, (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1966). John D. Godsey, Barth and Bonhoeffer: The Basic Difference, (Quarterly Review 7, no. 1, Spring 1987).