TheEcumenicalandInterfaith LandscapeinBonhoeffer’sTimes
VictoriaJ.Barnett
VictoriaJ.BarnettistheDirectorofProgramsonEthics,Religion,andtheHolocaustattheUS HolocaustMemorialMuseum1
Itisadelight,apleasure,andanhonourtobeinvitedtothiseventhonouringthepublicationof DietrichBonhoeffer’sEcumenicalQuest byKeithClements.Ihavepersonaland scholarlyreasonsforrejoicinginthepublicationofthisbook,andI’llbeginwiththe personalreasons.
Iservedfrom2004to2014asoneofthegeneraleditorsoftheEnglishtranslationof the DietrichBonhoefferWerke.Inadditiontobeingamemberoftheeditorialboard,Keith wastheeditorforvolume13oftheBonhoefferworks,whichcoveredtheperiodfrom late1933toearly1935whenBonhoefferservedseveralGermanparishesinLondon. It’salsooneofthevolumesinwhichBonhoeffer’secumenicalinterestsplayamajor role.AllofourvolumeeditorsofcoursedidasplendidjobandI’mnotgoingtolistmy favourites,butsufficeittosaythatKeithwaswonderfultoworkwithandsetavery highstandard,notjustintermsofhiseditorialworkbutintermsofhisexpertiseonthe ecumenicalworldandtheBritishchurchsceneduringthoseyearsinBonhoeffer’slife. SoIwasn’tatallsurprisedwhenIreadthegalleysof Bonhoeffer’sEcumenicalQuest todiscovernotonlyawell-writtenandengagingworkbutonethattrulyexpandsourunderstandingnotjustofwhatBonhoefferwas doing intheecumenicalmovement,butof whatthatecumenicalengagement meant inthelargercontextofhistheology.
Thatbringsmetothescholarlyreasonsforrejoicinginthepublicationofthisbook.An in-depthstudyofBonhoeffer’sroleintheecumenicalmovementislongoverdue,and Keith’sbookgivesusavividportraitnotjustofBonhoeffer,butoftheremarkableecumenicalleadersofthateraandthelargerissuesthatwereatstake.Therearenotmany
1 RemarksforthebooklaunchofKeithClements’ DietrichBonhoeffer’sEcumenicalQuest (WCCPublications),4March 2015.
302
DOI:10.1111/erev.12163
Copyright V C (2015)WorldCouncilofChurches.PublishedbyJohnWiley&SonsLtd.
worksthatdocumenttheecumenicalhistoryofthatera,andmostofthoseareeither memoirswrittensometimeagoorlargerworks(suchasKlemensvonKlemperer’s 1993workontheGermanresistanceanditsecumenicalconnections)thatonlytouch ontheecumenicalworld.
KeithhasdescribedBonhoeffer’ssignificanceinrelationshiptotheecumenicalissues andtheecumenicalleaderswithwhomheworked.InmycommentsI’dliketousethe wide-anglelens,asitwere,tolookatthemuchbiggerpictureoftheecumenicalworld oftheearly20thcenturyinEuropeandinNorthAmerica,becauseIthinkthatbigpicturecangiveussomeinsightsintoBonhoeffer’stheologicaldevelopment.Whatdid theecumenicalworldmeanforDietrichBonhoeffer?
Thelate19thandearly20thcenturiesusheredinaneraofnewinternationalisminthe religiousworld,anewnetworkofconnectionsbetweenthechurchesofdifferent nationsandevenleadersofdifferentfaiths,andwiththatcameanewwayofthinking aboutfaithandthescopeofthechurches’mission.ThefirstmeetingoftheWorldParliamentofReligions,heldinChicagoin1893,drewaround5000delegatesfromaround theworldrepresentingthetenmajorworldreligions.IntheUnitedStates,theProtestantecumenicalmovement,consistingofthemainlineProtestantdenominational churches,formallyconstituteditselfintheFederalCouncilofChurchesin1908.In 1910theWorldMissionaryConferenceinEdinburghdrewaround1200delegates fromaroundtheworld.InEuropeecumenismbegantospreadrapidlyinthewakeof theFirstWorldWar,propelledbythewidespreadcommitmentofProtestantleadersin thedifferentEuropeannationstoworkforpeace,andleadingtothefoundingofthe ConferenceonLifeandWorkin1925andtheConferenceonFaithandOrderin1927. IntheUnitedStatestheinterfaithmovement(Protestants,Catholics,andJews)began duringthelate19thcentury,andtheNationalConferenceofChristiansandJews, whichinitiallybeganasanofficeoftheFCC,wasformallyconstitutedin1932.
Internationally,ofcourse,therootsofmanyoftheseorganizationscanbetracedto Europeancolonialism.Foralltheir international diversity,mostoftheearlymissionary conferencesandeventheWorldParliamentcanbeviewedaslegaciesandcontinuities ofcolonialism.Nonethelesstheseinternationalencountersbegantofosterchangesata muchmorefundamentallevel:mostoftheseearlyorganizationsandtheirleaderswere characterizedbyanopennesstootherreligioustraditionsandnon-westerncultures. Therewasespeciallyanoptimismaboutthepossibilitiesofinternationalunderstanding. Thinkforamomentoftheverynameofthe“WorldAllianceforPromotingInternationalFriendshipthroughtheChurches”!Butthisearlyoptimismwasshatteredbythe violenceandcarnageoftheFirstWorldWarandthesocialandpoliticalturbulence
thatspreadacrossEuropeinitswake,especiallytheriseofethno-nationalism, anti-Semitism,andfascismindifferentcornersofEurope.Inthe1920sand1930sthese twotrajectoriesinthereligiousworldbegantoconfronteachotherasideologicaland theologicalopposites:ontheoneside,theecumenicalaffirmationofinternationalism, reconciliationamongthenations,andpacifism;ontheotherside,thefascistdedication tonationalistandethnocentricagendas.
ThiswasthelandscapeontowhichBonhoeffersteppedinthelate1920s.Letus rememberforamomentwhohewouldhavebeenatthetime:ayoungGerman,born in1906,wholikemanyofhisgenerationhadsufferedthedevastatinglossofabrother inthefirstworldwarandcameofageinGermanyinaneraofgreatGermanresentmentandbitternessagainsttherestofEurope.Heflirtedbrieflywithnationalismby joiningtheparamilitary“Stahlhelm”organization,andhegaveseverallectures,onein BarcelonaandoneinNewYork,inwhichheshowsacertainsympathyfornationalism sentiments.Bonhoefferscholarstendtobrushallthisaside,butIthinkifwetakeatits facevalueithelpsexplainsomething,whichishisremarkableearly1933talkaboutthe Fuhrer’sappealforGermanyouth.Whatthoselecturesdemonstrateformeisthat Bonhoefferunderstoodandperhapstosomeextentevenfelttheappealofnationalism –andyetforseveralreasonshealsowascapableofcritiquingitanddrawingverydifferentconclusions.Oneofthosereasonswastheecumenicalmovement.Theinitial attractionofecumenismforBonhoefferwasthepossibilityofformingfriendshipswith youngChristiansfromFrance,fromHolland,fromGreatBritain.Bonhoefferwasa youngGermandrawntorethinkingthings,especiallyhiscountryandhisfaith,andhe wasdrawntotheinternationalstage.Inthelate1920sandearly1930stheecumenical worldwaswhereallthiscouldhappen,andinecumenicalcirclesDietrichBonhoeffer encounteredChristiansfromothercountrieswhosharedhisidealism.
Ecumenism’sappealforBonhoeffer,inotherwords,pre-datestheNaziera,butthe faultlinesbetweentheecumenicalmovementandNationalSocialismwereclearfrom thebeginning,becausetheidealsofecumenismandNazismweresofundamentally incompatible.Howironic,then,thatDietrichBonhoefferintroducedacertaintension intotheecumenicalworldbyvirtueofhisinvolvementintheGermanchurchstruggle. TheecumenicalworldinitsconfrontationwithNaziGermanywouldinaveryreal sensebehamperedbyitsideals,andthismeantacertaintensionwithBonhoefferhimself.ThefirstissuewastheGerman“churchstruggle,”thehighlycontentiousbattlein theGermanEvangelicalChurchbetweentheGermanChristians,theConfessing Churchandtheso-calledneutralleaders(oftenleftoutoftheequation)–thelatter beingthecautiouschurchleaderswhosoughttopreventschismandtriedtoprevent openconfrontationbetweenthechurchesandtheNaziregimeandasaresultmade
numerouscompromiseswiththeregime.Theecumenicalmovementthroughoutthe 1930s–althoughmostofitsleadersweregenuinelyhorrifiedbywhatwashappeningin NaziGermany–believedthatecumenismhadtobeabigtent,aforceforreconciliation andunderstanding.DietrichBonhoefferaskedthemtotakesides,torecognizethe ConfessingChurchastheonlylegitimatechurchinGermany,andultimatelyhelost thatbattle.
Helostthatbattle,Ibelieve,becauseofthesecondissuethatmadeecumenicalreactionstoNaziGermanysocomplicated–andthiswasthedrivingforcebehindmuchof theecumenicalendeavor:theissueofpacifism.Europeanecumenicalleaders–like manyofEurope’sdiplomats–desperatelywantedtopreventanotherEuropeanwar. Oncethatwarbeganin1939,theydesperatelywantedtofindawaytostopitquickly andreachsomekindofpeaceagreementwithGermany.Itisimpossibletolookatthe correspondenceandstatementsofthetimeandnotbebothmovedandsoberedby theiridealism.Theywantedpeace,buttheywantedapeacewithanationledbyabrutal, violentregimeanditsleaderwhowasdeterminedonterritorialexpansionandwar. After1939ironicallyBonhoeffer’sroleintheGermanresistanceconsistedofcarrying peacefeelersfromGermangeneralstocontactsinGenevaandRome,butthesewere peacefeelersfromaverymorallyambiguousgroupofGermanmilitaryanddiplomatic leaders.KarlBarthmuchlaterwroteEberhardBethgehowhehadwarnedBonhoeffer whenBonhoeffervisitedhiminSwitzerlandthatsuchpeacefeelershadnochanceof acceptance.IpersonallybelievethatsomeofthetextsinBonhoeffer’sEthicsandthe prisonlettersareinfactreflectionsonthemorallyambiguoussituationinwhichhe foundhimself.
Therewasathirdissue,however,whereIthinktheecumenicalmovement’svalues gavethemacertainclarity:thatoftheNazipersecutionofGermanJewsduringthe 1930sandthepersecutionofJewsacrossEuropeafter1939,culminatinginthemass murdersof6-8millionEuropeanJews.Inunderstandingtheecumenicalresponseon thisissueweneedtomakeanimportantandoftenoverlookeddistinction.Some groupsandindividualsatthetimetreatedanti-Semitismasatheologicalissue,rootedin ChristianteachingagainstJudaism;thestruggletorepudiatethistheologyreallytook holdaftertheHolocaustinorganizationscommittedtoChristian-Jewishunderstanding,althoughtherewerecertainlypeoplebefore1945whowereaddressingthis.But therewereothersectorsofthechurchthat,althoughtheyhadn’tdealtwiththeissue theologically,repudiatedanti-Semitismasanunacceptableformofprejudiceandasthe persecutionofaminority.Inotherwords,theytreatedtheNazipersecutionofthe Jewsasacivillibertiesissue.DietrichBonhoeffer’scontroversial1933essay“The ChurchandtheJewishQuestion”isoneofthebestillustrationsofthetensionbetween VictoriaJ.BarnettTheEcumenicalandInterfaithLandscapeinBonhoeffer’sTimes
thesetwoperspectivesthatwehave.Itincludesoneparagraphthatisdeeplyoffensive becauseitincludeseveryanti-JewishtropeinChristiantheology–andyettheessayasa wholeisacallforthechurchestochallengethelegitimacyoftheNazistate,andperhapsevenriseupagainstit,preciselybecauseofitspersecutionoftheJewishminority. That’sthetensionwefindinBonhoeffer,andasfaraswecantellitwasnevercompletelyresolved.Amongasmallgroupofecumenicalleaders(HenryLeiper,Adolf Freudenberg,andothers)itwasatensionaswell,buttheywerecommittedtohelping EuropeanJewseveniftheyhadn’tnecessarilyworkedoutthetheologyofthe Christian-Jewishrelationship.
WhatthatmeantconcretelyduringthewarwasthattheWorldCouncilofChurches (WCC)–primarilythroughitsrefugeeofficerAdolfFreudenberganditsleaderWillem Visser‘tHooft–becametheprimarypartneroftheWorldJewishCongressintryingto publicizethegenocideoftheEuropeanJewsandtryingtohelpJewishrefugees.In March1943theWCCandWJCjointlyissuedastatementcondemningtheongoing genocide.OneofmycolleaguesattheHolocaustMuseumiswritingamajorworkon theUSWarRefugeeBoard,whichafteritsestablishmentin1944senthundredsof thousandsofdollarstoEuropeinanattempttorescuesomeoftheEuropeanJews; muchofthatmoneywentthroughAdolfFreudenberg’sofficehereinGeneva.FreudenbergmetweeklywithGerhardRiegner,theheadoftheWorldJewishCongress,to discussthesituation,andRiegnerlaterinhismemoirsdescribedtheseecumenical friendshipsas“thelightinthedarkness”thatsurroundedhim.Ihadtheprivilegesome yearsagoofinterviewingRiegnerhereinGenevaaboutthesefriendships,andhe describedboththesolidarityheexperiencedaswellasthetheologicaltensions.
Idon’tthinkit’sacoincidencethatthesethreecentralissuesfortheecumenicalmovementwerealsocentralissuesforBonhoeffer,andit’sforthatreasonthatforanyindepthexaminationoftheseissuesinBonhoeffer’sthoughtweneedtounderstandwhat washappeningintheecumenicalworld.
SowhatdidBonhoeffermeanfortheecumenicalmovement?Orifwetakethewideanglelensperspective:WhatdidtheecumenicalmovementmeanforDBandhistheology?Letmejustconcludewithsomebriefobservations:
First,it’seasytolosesightofthefactthattheecumenicalmovementduringtheperiod from1933to1945wasreactingtoeventsinNaziGermanyevenasitwasinitsown criticalorganizationalperiodofconsolidation.WeseetheactionsofpeoplelikeAdolf Keller,HansSchonfeld,WillemVisser‘tHooft,JosephOldham,andothersthrough theperspectiveoftheBonhoefferstory,butseenonthismuchlargerlandscapethey
werebusywithmanyissuesthatdidn’ttouchonBonhoeffer’sconcerns.Theywere alsoimmersedintheongoingprocessofdefiningatheologyfortheecumenicalmovement–somethingthatBonhoefferwroteaboutandhadcalledfor.Thatprojectlooks muchbiggerwhenweexaminetheecumenicallandscapethanwhenwereaditthrough Bonhoeffer’sperspective.
Second,whenwelookatthebiglandscapeBonhoefferemergesasafairlyinsignificant figure.Hewasyoung.Hisfocuswasoncertainissues.Bonhoeffer’ssymbolicimportancehasobscuredthat,andunfortunatelyithasobscuredtheworkofotherswho deservemuchcloserexaminationinthehistoryofthisperiod:suchasFreudenbergand theWarRefugeeBoard;theStaewen-BarthcircleandBarthhimself;SiemundSchultze,HenryLeiper,BernhardKahnandtheJewishJointDistributionCommittee; andthescoresofChristianandJewishactivists.TheBonhoefferstoryasweknowit hasalsoobscuredandinsomewaysdistortedourunderstandingofcertainpeopleand theirroles:forexample,ArchbishopofCanterburyWilliamTempleandKarlBarth.
Third,Bonhoeffer’sdifferentperspectivebecomesespeciallyclearduringthewar,a timeduringwhichanumberof“thinkpieces”werebeingdraftedbyecumenicalleaders likeWilliamPatonandVisser‘tHooft,whoweresearchingforconceptsthatwould helpinthemoralreconstructionofEuropeinthewakeofNazism.Manyofthese documentsexplicitlycallforthe“re-Christianization”ofEurope.Bonhoeffer’stextsin Ethics andthe LettersandPapersfromPrison,incontrast,takeaverydifferentapproach, becausehefeltthatChristianityinGermanyhadfailed.Hisnotionof“religionless Christianity”isbotharejectionofthesocialconstructofChristianityasithadexisted andareturntotheessentialsofwhatitmeanstolivethelifeoffaith.
What,then,doesthisbigpicturetellusaboutDietrichBonhoeffer?Likeallthebigpicturesofthatera,itgivesusaclearersensethathewasayoungman,anditremindsus thatBonhoefferinmostrespectswasaminorplayerinmostofthestorieswelookat. Hemadeanimpactbuthedidnothavealeadingrole.Thatisnotatalltodismissor minimizehim;infact,Ipersonallybelieveitisthroughthisclaritythatwegetabetter senseofhispoignantpotential,andaglimpseofthelargerissuesworthyoffurther examination.Forallthesereasons,Ihopethatthisbookwillopenthedoorformore worksonBonhoefferandtheecumenicalmovement. VictoriaJ.BarnettTheEcumenicalandInterfaithLandscapeinBonhoeffer’sTimes