Fuller Theological Seminary

The Relevancy of the Life & Times of Dietrich Bonhoeffer

A Paper

Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Course

ET 525: Christian Ethics of Bonhoeffer

Dr. Glen Stassen

By

Jack Hakimian

Spring 2007
 Table Contents

Introduction 2

Manifest Destiny 3

Foreign Policy 8

International Perspective 12

Theological Influence 17

Conclusion 23

Bibliography 24

1
 Introduction

The goal of this paper is to demonstrate the relevancy of the life and times of

Dietrich Bonheoffer to the contemporary church as we engage the world with its various

happenings and disciplines. As we analyzed the ethics of Dietrich Bonheoffer in our class

discussions and readings, some key themes kept demonstrating to me the importance of

exegeting his life for our contempary audiences today. I could not stop thinking how

people need to learn about this man’s life and the historical context he found himself in. I

can see why Professor Stassen wrote in the syllabus,

“Dietrich Bonheoffer’s life was incomplete. He set an incisive course for us,
but could not complete it. Our calling is to help complete that course, in
prayer, in action, and in teaching others in the churches and outside who need
the real gospel.”1

Bonhoeffer’s life teaches us how we should look and deal with such critical issues as the

war in Iraq, the presence of racist religious movements like the Nation of Islam or ultra-

patriotic evangelicalism, foreign policy, terrorism, activism, and so on.

In this paper I will deal with some of those key themes drawn from his life, the

historical context of his teachings and praxis that can help Christians avoid mistakes of

the past, while being a transforming presence for the future. My goal is that we would

learn from Bonheoffer’s social context, and his interpretation of Christ nature, His Gospel

and His ethics. I will draw my thoughts heavily from the Cambridge Companion to

Dietrich Bonheoffer edited by John W. de Gruchy. In each subsection I will expound on

2
German society in comparison to Bonheoffer’s views, with interjection of my own

personal and biblical reflections as to how I interpret the data in relation to our modern

times. I will follow the mission of the class which is, as Professor Statessen documented,

“...think about how to carry his incisive course forward in thought and in deed.”2

Manifest Destiny

When Dietrich Bonheoffer was born (1906-1945), Germany was in a naval

competition with Britain. Britain’s mindset was not to conquer the world as they enlarged

their navy, but Germans on the other hand were convinced that expansion was their

destiny. They believed that that their, “future role in history was to further expansion in

the world by being vigorously competitive with other powers”.3 These ideas were

propagated by the Grand Admiral Alfred von Tirpitz (1890-1930), Professor Max Weber,

Philosopher G.W.F. Hegel (1770-1831), Historian Heinrich von Treitshke (1825-96),

Social Scientist Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886), Theologians Adolf von Harnack (1851-

1930) and Reinhold Seeberg (1859-1935). Essentially their ideology was that, “if a nation

was not expanding it was dying.”4 The theologians of this time period actually gave this

view of expansion a theological credence. One of those men was Bonheoffer’s teachers

Adolf von Harnack. Von Harnack believed that God placed humans in the world to

compete for authority as history had taught them. They believed we learn about God’s

nature and will (revelation) not so much from the Bible, but from the lessons taught in

1
ET525: Christian Ethics of Dietrich Bonheoffer Syllabus
2
ET525: Christian Ethics of Dietrich Bonheoffer Syllabus
3
John W. de Gruchy. Cambridge Companion to Dietrich Bonheoffer. Cambridge. UK: Cambridge
University Press, 2005, 7.

3
history.5 One of those lessons is that nations need to grow and rule others or else they will

die and be overtaken. Since God was behind them as a Christian nation and they were

clearly developing at a faster rate then other nations like Britain, then they should expand

and bring the judgment of God as God’s chosen race.6 As an Arian people, the new

Israel, God did promise them, “The LORD will make you the head, not the tail”.7

The expansionist ideas of Germany are very similar to what American Social

Scientists refer to as “manifest destiny”. This ideology marks the thinking of early

American leaders, like President Andrew Jackson who basically believed that America

was destined to establish uninterrupted political authority across the entire North

American continent, from one ocean to the other.”8 Another interpretation of the meaning

could be, “Anglo Saxon Christians’ right and obvious call by God to expand their rule

over the nations of the world in order to promote peace and democracy.”9 According to

Britannica Concise Encyclopedia,

“The phrase was coined in 1845 by the editor John L. O'Sullivan, who
described the U.S. annexation of Texas and, by extension, the occupation of
the rest of the continent as a divine right of the American people. The term
was used to justify the U.S. annexation of Oregon, New Mexico, and California
and later U.S. involvement in Alaska, Hawaii, and the Philippines”10

4
John W. de Gruchy, 7.
5
John W. de Gruchy, 7.
6
John W. de Gruchy, 8
7
Deuteronomy 28:13
8
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny
9
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny
10
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9050542/Manifest-Destiny

4
 Like German expansionist ideology, many influential leaders in America bought into

this perspective. Some, even like the famous American poet Walt Whitman, said many

contradictory things. For example he went from noble comments such as, “For every

atom belonging to me as good belongs to you?" Or when he wrote, "Whoever degrades

another degrades me, and whatever is done or said returns again to me?"11 To saying

contradictory statements such as this,

“What has miserable, inefficient Mexico—with her superstition, her burlesque

upon freedom, her actual tyranny by the few over the many—what has she to

do with the great mission of peopling the new world with a noble race? Be it

ours, to achieve that mission!"12

You can sense in the backdrop from the tone of his comment the disdain he has for

Mexicans, based on the premise that they are morally depraved and in need of pure

Christian rule. Mexican Historian Miguel Ángel González Quiroga writes,

“It is dangerous to underestimate the power of an idea. Especially one which

captures the imagination of a people. Manifest Destiny was such an idea. To
extend American democracy to the rest of the continent was to place a mantle
of legitimacy on what was essentially an insatiable ambition for land. Some
have argued that it was villainy clad in the armor of a righteous cause, to use
an expression by Lippman”13

11
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_power_of_an_idea.html
12
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_power_of_an_idea.html
13
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_power_of_an_idea.html

5
 Yet we find these same types of ideas and rhetoric were prevalent in German

thinking before Hitler came to power. In many ways, he only preached and actualized

what many in the higher class of Germany were already contemplating for years. Of

course, he took the ideas to the extreme, but history teaches us that he did not receive

much resistance. As the Germans asked the “Jewish question”, which basically was,

“How should we respond to what we perceive as a social problem these Jews are causing

by their economic exploits and national disloyalty?” Hitler responded to the question by

declaring, “We should get rid of them through various stages of persecution,” which

ultimately resulted in mass genocide. His secret intention all along. Hitler’s horrific plan

was referred to as “Final Solution to the Jewish Question”.14 Based on this ideology of

“manifest destiny” and supremacist thinking they in time unmasked, like the early

Americans, the same concept of expansion and conquest through war. Not only where

Jews affected, but so where homosexuals, gypsies, Jehovah’s witnesses and a few

others.15

Today the problem of villainizing people is seen in America portrayal of

Muslims. Due to the September 11, 2001, attacks, and negative reporting from the press,

most Americans feel like Muslims are a threat to the world order, especially American

life. In many ways people are asking now, “The Islamic Question”, what will we do with

these barbaric Muslims? America, for much of its history, has had an "Isolationist" view

toward foreign involvement, but after 9-11-01 our country has developed more of a

14
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/final.html
15
http://holocaust.hklaw.com/essays/1999/994.htm

6
proactive perspective in global affairs.16 But, what should that involvement look like?

Should we bring order with military might, or with our economic and educational help to

underdeveloped nations? Hunington and Harrison argue in their book Culture Matters:

How Values Shape Human Progress that, essentially, values transform nations into

prospering societies. Prosperity is birthed when people have an internal desire for change,

believe they can develop and seek innovative methods to build their industries. But,

people cannot be innovative if they don’t question “what is”. Good education teaches

nationals to question the world and explore new answers and possibilities for economic

growth, national stability and contribution to the global community. The protestant values

have enriched American life and have been a positive factor of growth for previously

colonized countries or nations influenced by Europe.17 They write,

“Education is the principal instrument of this nurturing. However, this must

be a form of education that helps the individual discover his or her own truths,
not one that dictates what the truth is. In value systems resistant to
development, education is a process that transmits dogma, producing
conformist and followers”18

This perspective of “new values” changes the way we look at our Middle East policy.
Should we have gone into the Iraq with guns, tankers and missiles or with hands out
ready to shake and have unilateral discussions with tyrants like Saddam Hussein? We
had, and possibly still have, an opportunity to be a global example to a world that is
crying out for the Spirit of Jesus. We can show the world how a powerful proactive
peace initiative can really bring human and civil rights for many. Look at the example
of Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Men who realized the power of non-violent

16
John. Isbister. 2006. Promises Not Kept: Poverty and the Betrayal of Third World Development. 7th ed.
Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press, 202
17
Lawrence E. Harrison and Samuel Huntington. 2000. Culture Matters: How Values Shape Human
Progress. New York, NY: Basic Books, 47.

7
response, use of societal laws, and appeals to human conscience. This approach does
not mean we stop investing in military defense or intelligence research; what it does
mean is, that we show concern to our neighbors and genuinely love them because as
our paper bills say, “In God We Trust”. If we help other countries grow economically
we can expect corruption to be minimized. In fact according to the Transparency
International 1998 Corruption Perceptions Index, the top twenty countries with the
least corruption have a per capita income in purchasing power of $17,000 U.S. or
more.19 While the top twenty most corrupt countries have a per capita income of
$4,000 or less. This tells us that we should be concerned and working towards regional
development throughout the world, rather than just using people for our political
maneuvering. This leads me to my next point of foreign policy. What should it look
like? How does Bonhoeffers ethics help inform our reasoning?

Foreign Policy

The author Isbister makes a distinction between two types of foreign policies that

America has upheld. Globalism vs. Regionalism. The difference is that globalist saw the

world as chess game with third world societies as pawns to be used to further US interest

and influence.20 The contrary policy of regionalism was top put “human rights” and the

empowering of these third world countries first, so that by wining people’s hearts

American interest could be protected. The cause of the globalist perspective in our

foreign policy was to minimize communist influence from spreading in other parts of the

world. To the point that it put people in power in third world countries who had no

18
Lawrence E. Harrison and Samuel Huntington, 50.
19
Lawrence E. Harrison and Samuel Huntington, 115.
20
John. Isbister, 192.

8
concern for the poor, economic development plan or human rights concern. Their rational

was, “He may be a son of bitch, but he’s our son of bitch.”21 This kind of foreign policy

created the tragedy of making the poor hate us more. In fact, most of these

underprivileged societies had no interest in choosing sides in the cold war. But after our

mistreatment the die was cast.

We can see how Bonheoffer’s challenge to the church is pretty relevant for

American social structures today. We should avoid having just a pure national identity

that only emphasizes the issues of our countries, without any acknowledgement to our

neighbors. This is what Hitler and influential thinkers in Germany did. Their concern was

for Germany and not their neighbors. The church should avoid lining up with politicians

in such extreme patriotic ways. National interests should not override international

concerns, especially when they effect our sister churches in oppressed parts of the world.

Isbister writes concerning America’s role in the world today,

“An alternative foreign policy would take the threat if terrorism seriously, but
it would see the interest of the industrially advanced country in broader terms.
It would advocate democracy, economic development, and human rights in the
world, as well as the more traditional goals of security and prosperity.”22

This is a more balanced approach, which even Bonheoffer advocated. His understanding

of human rights is critical, if we are going to avoid the trap of imperialism and genocide.

In Bonheoffer’s understanding of “natural life” he subscribed to the enlightenment

philosophy that all human beings have a right to liberty and equality in order to

21
John. Isbister, 192.
22
John. Isbister, 202.

9
experience human fulfillment.23 Due to the enlightenments French association and their

secularized society, most Germans rejected the basic tenets of human rights, because they

didn’t want anything to do with a people they considered liberal and pagan. Not

understanding the Christian origins of human rights, Germans altogether rejected it.

Bonheoffer’s work shows that he tried to revive the conversation of human rights as he

critiqued Hitler's regime and the anti-Jewish sentiment spreading throughout Germany.

America has and could experience the same fate. Many of our countries past

presidents have failed to stand for human rights. When Regan came into power he

removed all penalties placed by the Carter administration on nations violating human

rights.24 The Bush administration fought congress when it tried to put sanctions on China

for abusing demonstrators at the Tiananmen Square incident of 1989.25 Also, the Bush

administration refused to speak out against the Iraqi dictator Sadam Hussein when he

poured out chemical weapons against the Kurdish people. Only after the invasion in

Kuwait, which was purely an economic concern, did they boast of human rights as basis

for war.26 The Clinton administration wasn’t really much different. When the Rwandan

crisis took place and over 800,000 Tutsis and politically moderate Hutus were killed, the

administration refused to get involved because they didn’t believe genocide was taking

place.27 After the genocide stopped in order to “save their public face” they decided to

send humanitarian aid. The project was called, “Operation Support Hope”. According to

one researcher,

23
John W. de Gruchy, 210.
24
John. Isbister, 214
25
John. Isbister, 214
26
John. Isbister, 214

10
 “Though the operation certainly achieved its objectives and established a
protective, powerful presence, Operation Support Hope was required to leave
by October 1, 1994 (Borton 5.1). However, the United States withdrew earlier
than expected. As early as August 12th ……”28

Are these good examples of American globalism? We only do “good” when it personally

benefits our nation or helps us advance in the chess game. Bonhoeffer in chapter 6 of his

book Ethics, talks about the formation of ethics. He argues that the only true basis of

ethics is resting upon the knowledge of God. He argues that man must look at God and

the world at the same time to really develop a proper ethic. Only when they have their

eyes fixed upon Jesus Christ can a person not be “confused” and turned “upside down”

by all kinds of distorted concepts.29 If we here in America as Christians and secularists

(possible Christians) don’t develop such a view of human rights that flows out of the

knowledge of Christ and the formation of Christ in us, we too are in danger of repeating

the mistakes of other people who could not resist the pressure and tyranny of their

leaders. Human rights must precede our call to do missions, expand democracy, or

position ourselves in other territories for the sake of self (USA) preservation. Rather we

must become conscious of what is happening in the church and global communities. We

must, as God did when he became man, be willing to love others incarnationally meetings

their deepest need for respect, justice and access to basic resources. As Bonhoeffer wrote,

27
http://www.scrippscollege.edu/dept/core/core2/Communities%20of%20Hate%20Spring%202007/Chapter
%204%20Charles%20United%20States%20Response%20to%20the%20Rwandan%20Refugee%20Crisis.h
tm
28
http://www.scrippscollege.edu_______
29
Dietrich Bonhoeffer. 1995. Ethics. 1st ed. New York, NY: Touchstone, 70.

11
“…the reason why we can live as real men and can love the real man at our side is to be

found solely in the incarnation of God, in the unfathomable love of God for man.”30

International Perspective

Bonheoffer’s fight in propagating the ecumenical movement is birthed in this type of

context where the German churches failed to see themselves as part of a wider global

Christian community. Originally, Bonheoffer had their narrow view, but everything

changed as He became exposed to Christians from other countries such as Italy, Spain,

the United States and England. 31 Also, while at Union Seminary in New York (1930-‘31)

He was encouraged by the unified response to oppression, the powerful preaching and

dynamic faith of the African American members of Abyssinian Baptist Church in

Harlem.32 Also, his pacifist friend Jean Lasserre challenged his interpretation of the

Sermon on the Mount, which completely changed the way he looked at discipleship.

Most Germans, including Bonheoffer viewed the Sermon on the Mount as too idealistic

and impossible to obey in the real world. Rather, the Sermon on the Mount was viewed as

a tool for conviction upon the sinner and a means to lead them to Christ for forgiveness.33

As Bonheoffer’s views changed based on these various experiences, he saw the need for

the church to avoid supporting any country that worked towards domination of others by

means of genocide and manipulation. This went against the ethic of Jesus, who calls us to

30
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, 76.
31
John W. de Gruchy, 19.
32
John W. de Gruchy, 29,31, 154.
33
John W. de Gruchy, 155.

12
work towards peacemaking. Even though most Germans held to the “two kingdoms”

perspective, which basically taught that the church had no right to interfere in the policies

of the state and the state had no right to interfere in the policies of the church, Bonheoffer

rejected that interpretation. Rather, he saw the contradiction of isolating Jesus from the

“whole world” and as a result he refused to give loyalty to the Fuhrer as other Confessing

Church members did.34 Bonhoeffer's loyalty lay in his faith to Jesus the Lord of the

Church and the Universe! He saw the need to protect other believing Jews and non-

Christians in general, even if it meant conspiring to kill Hitler. As he declared in 1933,

“One must consider to ‘put the spoke in the wheel’ (of the state)”.35 In fact, Bonhoeffer's

view of discipleship as outlined in his book Cost of Discipleship cannot be separated

from the book Life Together. Both were written to illuminate each other.36 To be a single

minded devoted disciple of Jesus and to follow the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount

is to behave responsibly on behalf of the church and national German community.37 He is

in a real sense feeling that he must become a representative of the community and take on

their guilt. Guilt, of course, that God will forgive through Jesus Christ. When leaders

develop an ethic of love and justice, they not only protect the other countries interest, but

in the long run they protect their own by turning their enemies into friends. As Paul wrote

in Romans 12:19-21,

“Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is
written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord. On the contrary:
‘If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to
drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.’

34
John W. de Gruchy, 20.
35
John W. de Gruchy, Pg 20.
36
John W. de Gruchy, 126.
37
John W. de Gruchy, 127.

13
 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good”

Bonhoeffer moved from dead theories to actual praxis. As he said, when he left New

York he was no longer a theologian, but a Christian (Christ follower).38 We too must

embrace the ethic of Jesus which is to build our house on a rock by obeying his Word.39

As one author wrote,

“We could also go forward with the solid eschatological heritage of our
religious and theological tradition and decide that liberation and revolutionary
change are our task as religious people and as theologians within that religious
praxis” 40

What a profound challenge laid upon pastors, theologians, philosophers and Christians in

general to move beyond speculative theorizing of scripture to mere love that works for

actual societal and spiritual transformation. In his book Transforming Power, Linthicum

challenges churches to understand the necessity and effectives of relational power. He

argues that power is not a bad reality to be avoided, but one that should be used for the

“Glory of God” and the enriching of peoples lives, especially the marginalized. He

describes this biblical mandate as a striving for the “shalom” of the city.41 In this concept

of shalom, six things are involved:

1. bodily health (Ps 38:3

38
Dr. Stassen Spring Lecture Series
39
Matthew 7:24
40
Georgi, Dieter. 2005. The City In The Valley: Biblical Interpretation and Urban Theology. 7th ed.
Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 339.
41
Linthicum, Robert C. 2003. Transforming Power: Biblical Strategies for Making a Difference in Your
Community. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 36

14
 2. security and strength (Judg 6;23;Dan 10:19)

3. a long life ending in a natural death (Gen 15:5)

4. prosperity and abundance (Job 5:18-26; Ps 37:11)

5. successful completion of enterprise (Jug 18:5; 1 Sam 1:17)

6. Victory in war (Jug 8:4-9). (note that shalom does not necessarily mean a

cessation of conflict; it means victory for Israel troops)

When we look at these definitions in totality we realize that we, as Christians, should

be seeking for our churches, communities and countries a dimension of life that can truly

be blessed. This blessing according to God is holistic and tangible. Deuteronomy 28:1-11

reads,

“If you fully obey the LORD your God and carefully follow all his
commands I give you today, the LORD your God will set you high above all
the nations on earth. All these blessings will come upon you and accompany
you if you obey the LORD your God: You will be blessed in the city and
blessed in the country. The fruit of your womb will be blessed, and the crops of
your land and the young of your livestock--the calves of your herds and the
lambs of your flocks. Your basket and your kneading trough will be blessed.
You will be blessed when you come in and blessed when you go out. The
LORD will grant that the enemies who rise up against you will be defeated
before you. They will come at you from one direction but flee from you in
seven. The LORD will send a blessing on your barns and on everything you
put your hand to. The LORD your God will bless you in the land he is giving
you. The LORD will establish you as his holy people, as he promised you an
oath, if you keep the commands of the LORD your God and walk in his ways.
Then all the peoples on earth will see that you are called by the name of the
LORD, and they will fear you.”

15
 This is a result of blessing God and blessing people, even the aliens in our

communities with justice, Sabbath rest, and years of jubilee.42 For God himself declared

in Exodus 22:21 "Do not mistreat an alien or oppress him, for you were aliens in Egypt”.

If the German church hadn’t minimized the Old Testament teaching due to their anti-

Jewish sentiment they would of saw the consistent call of Jesus as the God of the Old and

New Testament challenging “His people” to love their neighbors in tangible ways. In

Leviticus 19:18 it reads, "'Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your

people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.” This is a real God, calling

His people to act in real love, even when offended by people they may perceive as

enemies. That is why Jesus can say some 1500 years after the Law of Moses that we are

not to get angry and insult people, rather we are to seek reconciliation before we engage

in acts of worship to the Father who created the person whom we have been and are

offended by. In the Sermon on the Mount Matthew 5:23-26 it reads,

"Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that
your brother has something against you; leave your gift there in front of the
altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your
gift. "Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court.
Do it while you are still with him on the way, or he may hand you over to the
judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown
into prison. I tell you the truth, you will not get out until you have paid the last
penny”

42
Leviticus 25
16
 Theological Influence

In Bonheoffer’s dissertation he wrote his views on Human Sociality and Christian

Community titled “Sanctorum Communion”.43 He argued that the basic biblical doctrines

of creation, sin, justification could not be understood without sociality.44 A person is only

a person as he exists in relation to God and the other person.45 This means that a person

can only know God and be in relation to God as he is in relation with his neighbor, and he

can only be a person as he exists in relation to his neighbor. In fact our identities are

formed in ethical encounters with others.46 The purest ethic towards another person flows

out of the revelation of Jesus Christ. Clifford Green writes concerning the basis of

Bonhoeffer’s ethic, “the focus is Christocentric-the Trinitarian articulation is present in

Bonhoeffer, but Christology is in the ground.”47 As Bonheoffer developed his ethic of

social responsibility based on Jesus Christ, this led him to the conclusion that if a person

or community witness’s injustice being perpetuated; they are responsible to act in such a

way to eradicate the injustice that is destroying the life of the community. Like Jesus

Christ who acted to justify sinners and save them from hell by going to the cross. He

wrote,

“Civil courage, in fact, can grow out of the free responsibility of free men.
Only now are the Germans beginning to discover the meaning of free
responsibility. It depends on a God who demands responsible action in bold

43
John W. de Gruchy, 113.
44
John W. de Gruchy, 113.
45
John W. de Gruchy, 115.
46
John W. de Gruchy, 115.
47
John W. de Gruchy, 115.

17
 venture of faith, and who promises forgiveness and consolation to the man
who becomes a sinner in that venture”48

Today what kind of ethic is being developed here in North America? Is it an ethic of

“isolationism” or “peaceful activity”? In the book Promises Not Kept by John Isbister he

argues that the rich of North America refuse to grapple with what is happening in the

world, because it would make them uncomfortable. If we asked questions such as, “Does

our material comfort require others to be poor?” Are we making world poverty worse, or

are we part of the solution? Should we try to be part of the solution? What solutions

might there be? Will an attack on world poverty require sacrifices from us? What kind of

sacrifices?” Questions like these are what people, including Christians, avoid so that we

won’t have to get involved. Isbister writes,

“It is a stretching analogy only a bit to recall the “good Germans” of the 1930s
and 1940s who knew nothing about the Holocaust being perpetrated by the
regime to which they gave loyalty because they did no want to know”49

Then he writes,

“Most people in the developed countries, having achieved a comfortable

standard of living, are largely oblivious to the fate of the world’s majority and
of their own responsibility for that fate.”50

48
John W. de Gruchy, 20.
49
John. Isbister, 26
50
John. Isbister, 27

18
Unless we understand the context in which Bonhoeffer developed his ideas of

“Sanctorum Communion” we will not appreciate the richness of his biblical

understanding of “community” and “responsibility”. Most German Theologians held the

theological perspective of “orders of creation”. According to Keith Clements,

“This is the doctrine that certain structures of human life are not just
incidental biological or historical phenomena, but are deliberately ordained of
God as essential and immutable conditions of human existence, without which
humanity is not humanity as created by God.”51

This was no different than what expansionist did prior to Mexican-American war. Many

felt it was the mission of the United States to “regenerate Mexico” by bringing

Protestantism to their country. Many felt that the soldiers would liberate the country from

dead religious leaders and nonfunctional system of government.52 In the book Promises

Not Kept, John Isbister writes,

“Christianity provided a moral cloak that could mask the destruction wrought
by imperialist. Massacres were justified in Latin America on the grounds that
they led to the advancement of the Christian faith. In the California missions,
Spanish padres held Natives in virtual slavery, while apparently persuading
themselves that they were saving souls.” 53

So, it appears that some of the greatest social movements in the last two centuries that

have oppressed others for the sake of equality and goodness have had their origin from

distorted theological interpretation. This is the kind of distortion that Bonhoeffer seeks to

counter in his book the Cost of Discipleship. Responding to the “two kingdom” view and

51
John W. de Gruchy, 163
52
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_manifest_destiny2.html

19
the inactive faith he was witnessing amongst the many professors of the faith, Bonhoeffer

argued that true faith, will have true obedience.54 He explores this perversion of

Christianity deeply in the chapter called, Costly Grace. In it he makes distinctions

between “cheap grace” and “costly grace”. He writes,

“Cheap grace is preaching forgiveness without repentance, it is baptism

without the discipline of community; it is the Lord’s Supper without
confession of sin; it is absolution without personal confession. Cheap grace is
grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without the living,
incarnate Jesus Christ”55

Today we can see the same issues confronting our churches that faced Bonhoeffer and

put the church in a weak status as crisis broke out in German society. When sinful ideas

such as “manifest destiny” , “The Jewish question” pervade, when there is economic or

natural disaster usually the worst sort of evil can come from people as they look for

someone to blame. Sort of like the Adam and Eve syndrome.56 If churches do not have a

firm foundation to base their morals on and they don’t resolve to apply these kingdom

ethics, how can they be the “salt” and “light” influence in the world? In the book Life

Together Bonhoeffer articulates his devotional thoughts on how Christians can become

strong in faith if they join themselves in fellowship to a disciplined community of

believers who aggressively pursue after Jesus. He writes,

53
John. Isbister, 83-84
54
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. 2003. Discipleship. Edited by J. Wayne Whitson Floyd. 1st ed. Vol. 4.
Minneapolis, MN: First Fortress Press, 6.
55
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. 2003. Discipleship, 44.
56
Genesis 3:12,13

20
 “The more genuine and the deeper our community becomes, the more will
everything else between us recede, the more clearly and purely will Jesus
Christ and his work become the one and only thing that is vital between us.”57

When you study Black Nationalist thinking one of their critiques is that the

church at large did nothing as the institution of slavery was propagated.58 Recently, I

spoke at a conference held at Azusa Pacific University on the topic of “Mission to Nation

of Islam”. I presented to them that Nation of Islam is a pro-black religious movements

with racist ideologies and unorthodox Islamic views due to the social context they found

themselves in as African Americans. The core of their teachings is, that the black man

was the original person on earth and their founder Master Wallace Fard Muhammad is

the long awaited Messiah who came in bodily form as “Allah”. The socio\political

context of this movement is one of economic and political oppression. Basically, African

Americans up until the civil rights movements didn’t enjoy the basic human rights, let

alone the civil rights the constitution promised them. In response to the pacifist state of

the church and society at large this doctrine was formed and embraced by angry blacks in

the urban settings of America. These, like the German ideas of supremacy, are ideas that

can only be birthed in the stew of economic and social depression. Men like Hitler,

Wallace Fard Muhammad can take advantage of the situation. Since things in America

have change minimally the ideas of NOI have spread since 1930 up until now. Some

experts estimate their membership boast 19,000 - 30,000 devotees.59 If you listen to their

57
Dietrich Bonhoeffer.1954. Life Together: The Classic Exploration of Faith in Community. New York,
NY: HarperSanFrancisco, 26.
58
IV, Edward E Curtis. 2006. Black Muslim Religion In The Nation Of Islam, 1960-1975. North Carolina:
The University of North Carolina Press, 18-19
59
http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-nation-of-islam.htm

21
rhetoric carefully the main issues they have with Christianity is the mistreatment by

Anglos who claimed to be people of the book. Louis Farrakhan wrote in one of his

columns,

“I started with the U.S. Constitution, but I really want to go to the real
constitution. The real constitution, out of which the U.S. Constitution came,
was the Founding Fathers’ so-called love of Jesus Christ and the love of
scripture. They didn’t love it enough to see you and me as a part of this, but
they did love the Book”

What’s interesting is that in the same speech he makes an appeal to human rights over

and over again. The same language that Dietrich Bonhoeffer and many others have

advocated for American leaders to emphasize and practice. He writes,

“Every human need is a human right. Human beings are creatures—physical,

spiritual, emotional, intellectual and moral. We are born into this world with
human rights. Food is one. Clothing is another. Shelter is a human right
because it is a human need. Since you are not an animal, the brain must be
cultivated, so home and family is a human right. The protection of family, the
strengthening of marriage, the building of home life is a part of guaranteeing
unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Education is not a privilege. Education is a human right. It is knowledge that

separates the human from the beast; therefore, the best possible education
should be given by government and guaranteed by government. Otherwise,
the government is not guaranteeing the unalienable right of life, liberty and
the pursuit of happiness.

The American people’s human rights are being violated by the very
government that has been established to secure these rights. You can’t say that

22
 the government of the United States believes in securing these rights for all of
her citizens. If government really were doing the job of government, there
would not be so much dissatisfaction in America with government”

Conclusion

The lessons are clear. We can either listen to the rhetoric of the downtrodden or

those whom we consider enemies or we can ignore them. But, to ignore them we are only

perpetuating the spirit that Hitler had towards the Jews. One that disregards human

beings due to an ethnocentric theology, a politic of manifest destiny and a lack of God’s

active love. Is the church being critical and aware about the ideas being propagated by

fundamentalists and so called, “conservatives” who claim we have a right to be in Iraq

and to bring democracy through the use of the military powers, rather than regional

humanitarian works and dialogue with corrupt governments? Can’t we sit at the table and

make peace with moderate and fanatical Muslims? Or are they too barbaric for peace?

Can’t we apologize for sins we have committed unjustly and start the healing of deep

wounds? Bonhoeffer writes,

“In the New Testament, the enemy is always the one who hates me. Jesus does
not even consider the possibility that there could be someone whom the
disciple hates. Enemies should receive what sisters and brothers receive,
namely, love from Jesus’ followers. The actions of the disciples should not be
determined by human actions they encounter, but by Jesus acting in them.
The only source of the disciples’ action is the will of Jesus”60

60
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. 2003. Discipleship, 139.

23
 Bibliography

Books

Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. 1954. Life Together: The Classic Exploration of Faith in

Community. New York, NY: HarperSanFrancisco.

———. 1995. Ethics. 1st ed. New York, NY: Touchstone.

———. 2003. Discipleship. Edited by J. Wayne Whitson Floyd. 1st ed. Vol. 4.
Minneapolis, MN: First Fortress Press.

E. Harrisonn, Lawrence, and Samuel Huntington. 2000. Culture Matters: How Values
Shape Human Progress. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Georgi, Dieter. 2005. The City In The Valley: Biblical Interpretation and Urban
Theology. 7th ed. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature.

Gruchy, John W. de. 2005. Cambridge Companion To Dietrich Bonheoffer. 5th ed.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Isbister, John. 2006. Promises Not Kept: Poverty and the Betrayal of Third World
Development. 7th ed. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.

IV, Edward E Curtis. 2006. Black Muslim Religion In The Nation Of Islam, 1960-1975.
North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press.

Linthicum, Robert C. 2003. Transforming Power: Biblical Strategies for Making a

Difference in Your Community. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press.

Syllabus

ET525: Christian Ethics of Dietrich Bonheoffer Syllabus.

Websites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny.

http://holocaust.hklaw.com/essays/1999/994.htm.

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-nation-of-islam.htm.

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9050542/Manifest-Destiny.

24
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/final.html.

http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_manifest_destiny2.html.

http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_power_of_an_idea.html.

25