Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Spy, Assassin.
That’s the title of a movie that did the rounds a few months ago. It would have been good to do a review of it, but we operate in a much slower timeframe than mainstream media, so as a result nobody would be able to see the movie after reading the review. However, Glyn Cardy, minister of St. Lukes Presbyterian Church in Remuera, Auckland, has published a well-written review on Facebook, which you can read here:
However, what I can do is comment on the controversy that arose over the film and add some views of my own about Bonhoeffer, that can stand as a correction to the sometimes egregious distortions of his story.
The marketing poster for the movie (in America, not in Germany) showed Bonhoeffer holding a gun, suggesting that he was potentially a violent activist. People have consequently seen parallels between Bonhoeffer’s opposition to Hitler and evangelical Americans’ opposition to ‘woke’ or liberal causes. As a result, open letters have been written protesting any similarity between the two. Not only Bonhoeffer scholars but also descendants of the wider Bonhoeffer family and even the actors in the movie itself were motivated to warn in this way. The author of a popular recent biography of Bonhoeffer, Eric Metaxis, turns out to be pro-Trump, anti-abortion and in agreement with Trump that the election was rigged, and to have been propagating a similar (mis)interpretation of Bonhoeffer’s life and work after the publication of his book, which has a similar title to the movie.
Now Americans probably have little appetite for the subtleties of German politics and so it is understandable that the movie provides a simplified version of history, but this does not justify manipulating it in the interests of a right-wing version of current American politics.
Now some insights into Bonhoeffer from my reading of him.
- Unlike most of his contemporaries, Bonhoeffer was very clear from the beginning that he was in unconditional opposition to the ‘Arian paragraph’ in Nazi legislation, which excluded Jews from public office and church ministry. While most churches caved in and removed pastors of Jewish ethnicity from service, and the Confessing Church was mainly concerned with the purity of its gospel, seeing such exclusion as anti-gospel, Bonhoeffer said “Only he who shouts for the Jews can sing Gregorian chant” (Bethge p 361). In other words, don’t work on making the liturgy more relevant and interesting without at the same time being adamantly against racist anti-Jewish policies.
- The movie showed Bonhoeffer giving the Nazi salute, but in a very different setting. His companion Bethge was shocked when this happened and wondered what was going on. Once they were alone together, Bonhoeffer explained that the time was past when one could publicly oppose the Nazi regime. Opposition now needed to be hidden and secret. He was already involved with the circle of conspirators but could not reveal this.
- Bonhoeffer wasn’t just a ‘spy’ but a full-on double agent. He was employed by the German Abwehr and his role was to report on Allied troop movements for which his participation in ecumenical conferences was useful. That was his overt role and was ethically ambivalent as you can imagine. Any hints that other conference attendees might drop could be passed on to the Abwehr and used to further the German war effort. His covert role was as one in a circle of conspirators within the Abwehr that aimed to eliminate Hitler. Bonhoeffer explained that if it fell to him to do the deed, he would resign from the church beforehand, to avoid the church being caught up in the controversy that would follow. It’s probably hard for us to appreciate how difficult it would be for any German to assassinate Hitler, given that it meant helping to defeat one’s own country. Just to make it clear: Bonhoeffer was a double agent, first as an agent of military intelligence (which was traditionally German but not pro-Hitler) but also as a secret conspirator in the failed assassination of Hitler.
- In this double role, Bonhoeffer visited Bishop George Bell and tried through him to get the British Parliament to declare itself willing to negotiate with the rest of Germany if Hitler was assassinated. Bell worked hard at this but the result was clear: Britain required the unconditional surrender of Germany and was inclined to dismiss any conspiracy to take out Hitler as the egoism of disgruntled army officers. It is important to realise how difficult this made it for the conspirators. Elsewhere, those working against the German occupation were well supported by the Allies. For any opposition within Germany, there was no support.
- The movie goes into almost no detail about Bonhoeffer’s theology. Indeed, it has him declare at one point, “I’m done with theology.” In fact it was an egregious error to oppose theology and activism; for Bonhoeffer the activism flows from his theology. Particularly annoying is the absence of any mention of his theologizing in prison, in which he developed the concepts of religionless Christianity, God-of-the-gaps and humanity come of age. Since I read Bonhoeffer decades ago, more of his work has been published, including the sixteen volumes of the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works.
- The Cost of Discipleship is the first theological work I want to draw attention to. In it, Bonhoeffer articulates what it means to be a follower of Jesus. In particular it means rejecting the ‘cheap grace’ common in the Lutheran church of his time. Cheap grace means cut price forgiveness, the absence of any need to change your life and a bland following of one’s political leaders. Real discipleship is costly and it involves political action.
- In Life Together, Bonhoeffer articulates the result of his work leading a seminary for the training of Confessing Church pastors. While such training in Germany typically was very academic, individualistic and emotionally empty, Bonhoeffer emphasized the practical business of reading the bible, confessing sins, even face-to-face with another and just generally being a Christian community. While the German Lutheran church was practically a state church and required little financial support from its members, the Confessing Church was completely dependent on such support. This was a new experience and the seminary found help from well-meaning lay people until the Nazi authorities shut it down.
What is needed is in-depth study of Bonhoeffer, rather than a polemical and one-sided portrayal, whether by liberals or American evangelicals. He has much to teach us.
“Bonhoeffer was deeply pious in a way that some liberal Christians (again, in the contemporary U.S. sense of that word) might find hard to connect with and it’s that piety that speaks directly to evangelicals around the world. At the same time, he was a highly intellectual and critical Christian and therein lies his appeal for Christians on other points of the spectrum.” (Clifford Green)
Eberhard Bethge Dietrich Bonhoeffer London and New York 1970.
Hijacking Bonhoeffer by Clifford Green in The Christian Century October 19, 2010 .
Laurie Chisholm