THE ETHICS OF DIETRICH BONHOEFFER AND THE CRISIS OF NUCLEAR POWER
JVhfl t wo uld Di elri ch B o11 hoe. f/er hm 'e l o Jay tod ay re lative lo ! he ethic fl l iJJ11 eJ of a 1111cl e<tr <1ge? ls it /Jo JJi ble lo obey th e co11mzc111dm e11/J of G od in <111 1111mnbig11 0 11 s wfly? / I/t ho ug h t he re is 11 0 .ri m /il e (! !I SWe r, rele11m1t g uide lin es <1 re <11)(! ilr1 bl e
HuGH A. KooPs
Di etri ch Bonho e ffer was executed on April 9, 1945, shortly before the end of the second World War. Less than half a year after his death, on August 6, 1945, the fir st atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. It is, therefore , too much to expect of Bonhoeffer familiarity with the problems of nuclear warfare Only a few of the nuclear scientists of his day were able to comprehend , and even then in but small measure, what devastatin g po wer men had now unleashed . Of the power of atoms Bonho effer knew little if anything , and he did not anticipate the qualitative difference in war which nuclear weapons would effect.
Bonhoeffer himself was opposed to the war, and worked much to postpone , and later, to end it. He was inclined by nature toward .pacifism, a nd in 1934 had made plans to travel to India and study Mahatma Gandhi's non-violence method of resistance. Yet he was too familiar with the harsh realities of life to accept absolute pacifism as his own position. When asked what he would do if war came , he replied, "I shall pray to Christ to give me the power not to take up arms." But when the war drew near, he insisted on returning to Germany , though he was in America at the time, and arrangem e nts were being made for him to stay here. Upon his return to Germany , certain friends th ere pulled the necessary strings in his behalf so that he would not have to serve in the army. He was appointed a civilian employee of the Military Intelligence Service. With his brother-in -law he became personally involved in the resistance movement in Germany, personally risked his life in a journey to Sweden with information for British intelligence about the resistance movement within Germany, and later w a s indirectly related to the attempt on Hitler's life in July of 1944 Violence was now bein g placed in the service of the will of God. His pacifism became his sacrifice on the altar of obedience.
Bonhoeffer considered his entire experience as directed toward his treatment of ethics, and hoped to make of this treatment his greatest work. But the book which was .finally published under this name is at best a
fragmentary record of his thought. It was never completed. The edition we have is taken from notes he had hidden, for he had been forbidden to write. It is not in the order in which it was written, and much is omitted. But it is the best we have. Though it cannot be considered definitive, it is highly stimulating.
The Ethics does not deal explicitly with war itself, much less with nuclear warfare. In a lengthy section following his discussion of the Word of God, the natural, and the unnatural, Bonhoeffer develops the implication of the Roman natural law dictum, sttttm cuiqtte. Here he treats a number of moral issues: the right to bodily life, suicide, reproduction and nascent life, freedom of bodily life, and the natural rights of the life of the mind (in outline). There are in this section comments on war. He distinguishes killing in time of war from arbitrary killing, 1 discusses the attempt to justify the taking of life for the sake of the lives of others who are socially more valuable (an argument Bonhoeffer thoroughly rejects), 2 and defends the claim· of the state to a man's body in war. 3
In a later section on the structure of responsible life, Bonhoeffer introduces a few comments on war in relation to "ultimate necessities, a situation which no law can control." • This ultima ratio in the political field is war. Here "the suspension of the law can only serve the true fulfillment of it. In war, for example, there is killing, lying, and expropriation solely in order that the authority of life, truth, and property may be restored." 5 His comments throughout these two sections, however, are largely in the nature of illustrations. They are not directed toward a treatment of war. But they do show how far he has moved from pacifism.
Bonfoeffer's most extended comment on war is found early in the Ethics, under a section entitled "Inheritance and Decay." The inheritance here discussed is the unity of the west. This unity has been made by Jesus Christ. Here Bonhoeffer writes:
Jesus Christ has made of the west a historical unit. The epochmaking events of history affect the whole of the west. The unity of the west is not an idea but a historical reality, of which the sole foundation is Christ. The great movements in the life of the mind are henceforward the property of the entire western world. Even the wars of the west have the unity of the west as their purpose They are not wars of extermination and destruction like the wars of pre-Christian times and those which are even today still possible in Asia . So long as they are to be western wars they cannot, there-
1 Ethics, edited by Eberhard Bethge, translated by Neville H. Smith (New York: Macmillan , 1955) p.116. The following references are to the same work
2 P. 119.
3 P. 136
•1P. 207.
5 P. 229.
fore, ever be total wars . To tal war m akes use of all co n ce ivab le means whi ch may possi bly serve the purpose of national se l f-preservation. Anyt h ing whic h is of advantage to one's own cause is ri ghtfu l and permissib l e. Western wars h ave always distinguis h ed between means of warfare which are permissible and rightful and th ose which are prohibited an d crimin al. It was belief in a just, di vin e govern m e n t of the world whi ch m ade it possible to dispense with th e perhaps effective but ce rt ai nly un -Chri sti a n practices of killing th e innocent- torture, extor tion , and the rest. War now alw ays remained a kind of appea l to th e arbitration of God, which both sides were willing to accept. It is o nly wh en Chri stia n fa ith is lost that man mu st him se l f make u se of all m eans, even crim in al on es, in order to secure by force the victor y of hi s ca use. A nd thus, in the place of chi va l ro u s war betwee n Ch rist ian peoples, directed towards the achievement of unity in accordance wit h God's jud gment in hi story, there comes total war, war of d est ru ction, in which everything, even cr im e is justified if it serves to further our own ca use, and in which the enemy , whether h e be armed or defencel ess, is treated as a cri min al. On ly with th e adve nt of tot al war is th ere a thr ea t to the unity of the west. 0
One ca nnot read these words without recalling Bonhoeffer' s attack upon the later insist ence of th e Allied com m and on un co nditional surrender. They are just as much , how ever, a n at tack upon Nazi policy. On both si d es the unity of the west is being threatened. The form of Christ, the h eritage of th e west, h as lo st it s unity .
Bonhoeffer saw th e di stint egrat ion of unity beg innin g in the Reform ation, and the subseq u ent secu l arization in both Protestant and Rom a n Catholic ca mps. Today thi s di sint egra tion is found in th e service to which t echn olo gy is put, mass mo vem ent s, and mod ern revolutionary nationalism. By thi s loss of unity which th e western world possessed in Jesus C hrist, the western world is broug ht to the bi:ink of the void, the decisive struggle of the last days.
Thu s, though Bonhoeffer li ved prior to the nucl ear age, and gave no indication of awareness of th e specific form which power could t ake in this n ew age, hi s theoreti ca l a n alys is of the disintegration of th e unity of th e west show s a prophetic insight into our situation today . T ec hnology, placed in the serv ice of mass movements aroused by nationalism, has left u s with a weapon which allow s only total war. Today it is precisely the adve nt of total war which thr eate n s th e unity of the west. Our hope seems to re side in those r emn a nts of our inh er itance, the form of Christ, which still restrains the u se of weap on s we cannot control.
If hi s wisdom matches hi s vision , Bonhoeffer may we ll provide u s w ith resources in addr ess ing the problems of the nucl ear crisis.
6 Pp. 29f.
Bonhoeffer's location of the form of Christ within the heritage of the unity of the west is typical of his procedure. The form of Jesus Christ is the only form w hi ch overcomes the world. Christ shapes men in conformity with Himself. 7 This formation takes place in man, first of all through J es u s' taking form in His Church. But "even when we speak in terms of the formation of the world we arc referring solely to the form of J es us Christ." 8 The location of the form of J esus Christ within the unity of the west g iv es indication of the realistic character of Bonhoeffer's e thi ca l concern. But at the same time Bonhoeffer does not limit the form of Christ to its histori ca l manifestations.
Bonhoeffer will h ave no truck with ethical theory or practi ce which involves either total withdrawal from society or complete acceptance of society. He rather maintains both the judg m ent implicit in withdrawal from society, and the involvement implicit in acceptance of society. He threads his way between a naturalistic or positivistic ethic, and an idealistic or rationalistic ethic. He accepts the witness of both to the truth, but rejects both as but a partial and mis-directed witness. There is an urgency about the penultimate as well as the ultimate. One must combine simplicity, the awareness of God, with wisdom, the awareness of reality. His can be the way neither of compromise with reality nor of withdrawal from reality. He condemns both the secular Protestant and the monastic Roman Catholic .
His theoretical, or theological , justification of this combination is found in the person of Jesu s Christ. In Christ, Bonhoeffer finds both acceptance of reality and judgment upon reality. Christ is not only the Iricarnate One; he is also the Crucified and Risen One . Bonhoeffer builds his ethics upon this combination:
A Christian ethics constructed solely upon the basis of the incarnation would lead directly to the compromise solution. An ethic which was based solely on the cross or the resurrection of Jesus would fall victim to radicalism and enthusiasm. Only in the unity is the conflict resolved. 9
Within the history of the west Bonhoeffer finds this unity in the assimilation by the west of both the Roman and the Greek heritage. The Roman heritage represents the assimilation of antiquity, and the Greek heritage the opposition and hostility to Christ. Wherever the incarnation of Christ is stressed, there one finds reconciliation with antiquity; wherever the cross dominates, there one finds a breach between Christ and antiquity. "But Christ is both the Incarnate and the Crucified, and He demands to
7 Cf. the section on "Conformation ," pp. 17ff.
8 P 22.
9 P. 89.
be recogni ze d as both of these ali ke." 1 0 In the person of Jesus Chri st the et hi cs of Dietrich Bonhoeffer begins. Here the will of God has be en made manifest.
Thus Bonhoeffer can begin hi s tr eatment of any problem with a consideration of the si tu ation . But the situation alone is not enough. Before the ultim ate stands the penu ltimate , and the penultimate is a lways to be traversed. But the ultimat e does not come from the penultimate. Bonho effer's acceptance of reality - we may call it hi s "positivism" or his "naturalism" - is never without qualification . "Good is r ea lity itself," as a statemen t , is positivistic. Bonhoeffer does not make this statement without the modifier, "reality seen a nd reco g nized in God." 11 Reality cannot be conceived apart from God. His positivism always has thi s religious cast. The natura l is preserved by God a nd directed toward Christ. 1 2 The penultimate is determined by the ultimat e, not the reverse, a nd is preserved for the sake of the ultimate. 13
Life, reality, the penultimate, the natural, lie s und er the curse of the Fall. It i s always relative to the ultimate, but with dual potentialities. Life is thre atened by death; the natural is threatened by the unnatural. Within the penultimate one finds both a preparing of the way and a blocking of th e way. The natural is characterized by both "relative openness and relative closedness for Christ."H Thus within the natural the ethical task is to keep the way open to Christ. "There are sit uation s in which faith is easier or more difficult. " 1 5 Bonhoeffer's concern for the penultimate is the concern for the removal of those "conditions of the heart, of life, and of the world which impede the reception of grace in a special way, namely, by rendering faith infinitely difficult Th e state in which grace finds us is not a matter of indifference , even though it is always by grace alone that grace comes to us."rn
This is Bonhoeffer' s justification for his concern with the disintegration of the unity of the west, or any situation in which an ethical decision must be made . Creation and the incarnation demand respect for the natural. The form of Christ is manifested always in a concrete situation. The conduct of the responsible man is not established in advance, but "arises with the given situation." The situation is not simply material iop, 28.
11 P. 59.
12 P. 107
1 3 Pp. 91ff.
11 P. 102. t op, 99.
16 P. 94.
to be manipulated, but "this situation is itself drawn in into the action and shares in g ivi ng form to the deed." 17
Bonhoeffer's ana ly sis of the disunity of the western world has led to hi s description of our present sit uation as that of the "void." He has also g iven us a theological defence for his concern with the situation. But what can be done before the threat of the void? Says Bonhoeffer:
Two things alone ha ve still the power to aver t the final plunge into the void. One is the mi racle of a new awakening of faith, and the other is that force which the Bible calls the "restrainer," (II Thess. 2: 7), that is to say the force of order, eq uipp ed with great physical strength, which effective ly blocks the way of tho se who are about to plunge into the abyss.
Bonhoeffer then identifies the place where these two things appear: The place where the miracle of God is proclaimed is the Church. The "restrainer" is the power of the state to establish and maintain order. The two are entirely. different in nature, yet in the face of imminent chaos they are in close allian ce, and they are both alike objects of th e hatred of the forces of destruction, which see in them their deadliest enemies. 1 8
It is thus with these two forces that we must deal if we are to find a redemptive power in the face of the threat of nuclear extinction, the military face of the void .
I. THE RESTRAINT OF THE STATE
We begin with the nega tive force, the force which blocks the way to the abyss. This force is the state . Bonhoeffer is not greatly concerned about the form of the state. But there are certain requirements which the best form of government will attempt to realize:
That form of the state will be relatively the best in which it becom es most evident that government is from above, from God, and in which the divine origin of governme nt is most cle a rly apparent. .. That form of the state will be relatively the best which does not express its attachment to its subjects by restricting the divine authority which has been conferred upon it, but which attaches itself to its subjects in mutual confidence by just action and truthful speech. 1 9
Government does not play a very positive function in Bonhoeffer's thought, but government is positive in origin. It is one of the divine mandates. The term, " mandate," refers to "the conferment of divine authority on an earthly No matter what the historical origins of
17 P. 197, in the introduction to a section ca ll ed s ign ifi ca ntly, "Correspondence with Reality." It must be observed th at Bonhoeffer uses the verb, shares, rather than, e.g., det ermines. Ethics does not end with an ana ly s is of the situation. The form of C hri s t is not concl ud ed by the incarnation a lon e.
18 P. 44 .
19 Pp. 3 16f.
2ocf. pp. 76, 308, a lso 305.
a particular government may be , the bearers of the mandate receive their comm is sion from God. They are his repre se ntatives, his deputies . 21 Whether or not they recognize this deputyship is irrelevant.
As the deputie s of God, they have the authority to make decisions All decisions are to be made by those in these positions of authority, by those officials with authority within the rea lm of the particular mandate they represent. These officials are the definite historical and concrete form in which God makes his commandments heard . 22
Where the deputyship of government is denied, there the authority of God is denied. The denial of inferiority is the denial of God. 23 Where the authority of God, manifested concrete ly in gove rnment (or in labor, the family, and the church), is not ack nowledged , there the way is prepared for a vio l ation of the limits of each mandate, and the establishment of a totalitarian society .
Bonhoeffer's underst a ndin g of government is certainly critica l of the view of government held by many in America, although not necessarily of our government as such . Bonhoeffer does not believe that those in civil authority receive their authority from the people. They represent the people, but their authority comes from God. They are not responsible to the populace, but to God, whether or not they are aware of it. Because our form of government misleads many of our officials to believe they must constantly return to the people every election year for their mandate, our government does not lead the people to respect its authority. In other words, there is little protection for the elite in government. They are forced to be responsible to the mass . In this way they fail to exercise their authority, and the power to block the way to the abyss is thwarted .
More concretely, Bonhoeffer would be critical of the attempts made by many well -intentioned folk to tell the government what to do. He would not approve of the church, for instance , telling the state to lift the blockade on Cuba . On any item which is within the authority of the state, the voice of the people should not be elicited, lest it l ead to mistrust of government, and disorder.
This is not to say that Bonhoeffer accepts the state absolutely. The state is limited, as are all expressions of the mandates, in three ways: 1) by the authority of God, 2) by the limits of the mandate, and 3) by the relationship of inferiority. 24 Bonhoeffer's life, and death, is a testimony to the fact that he dared to resist the state. But this may be done only
21 P . 254.
22 P . 255.
23 Cf. pp. 252ff., "The Concrete Commandments and th e Di v in e Mandates " The mand a tes are also discuss ed in pp 73ff., and th e state is tr ea ted in Part II, No. III , "State and Church," pp. 297ff.
24 P . 255.
when the sta te h as violated it s limit s, and then only by o n e with responsi bility in th e m andat e th a t h as b ee n vio lated. When th e sta te dictated w h o might teach in the universities, or w ho might preach in the chur ch es , or who had to at te nd th e wors hi p serv ices, th en the state transgressed the boundaries of th e mandates of culture an d th e church. Then Bonhoeffer rebelled . 2 0
Our pre sen t situation is complicated by the fact that th e cri si s of nucl ea r war appears to depend upon the intere sts of competing power s, one of which is with considerable justification evaluated as tot alitari an. In such a conflict, the tempt ation always ex ists for th e l eg itim ate governm ent to ass um e a totalit ar ian form in oppos ition to totalitarianism. This be co me s n ecessa r y in tim e of war. But h ere a do se of Bonhoeffer's realism is pertinent. The conflict with Russia is not merely id eo lo gica l, but also imperial. This is not to minimiz e th e id eo logica l n atur e of the conflict, but we must realize the imperialism within Russia's history and h er present b e lli ge rence. It is precisely this imperialism which deliv ers us from the threat of total war, and makes possible a bal ance in which so m e form of peace can be m a int a ined. Bonhoeffer's realism and his optimism dem a nd th at we list e n to the political rea li st as well as th e ideolo g ica l anti-Communist. We can thus rejoice in Khrushchev's us e of ideol og ica l jargo n to advance Russian boundari es of influ e nce. If th e ideology were abs olute , it could not be used as a means to a noth er en d If imperialism is the e nd, tot al war can be avoided. The fact that communism was ea rly identified with a nation may prove to be more a hindranc e th a n a help to the spread of communism.
Thus Christian respon sibility, following the ethics of Dietrich Bonhoeffer , in regard to the state can b e con cre tely expressed in at le as t two affirmations:
1) Statements which reflect a denial of the divine origin of the authority of the state, when the state gove rns within its mandate, can tend only to disorder.
2) Movements which acknowledge only the antagonism of ideological conflict and not the identity of nation al interests, can only t end to total war.
II. THE MIRACLE OF FAITH
Having discussed the negative force which blocks the w ay to the abyss, we can now treat th e positive force which deliver s from the abyss, the miracle of faith . Thi s faith is proclaimed within the church. Thus our discussion turns from th e mandate of the state to th e m an date of the church.
25 P 257.
The chur ch h as the responsibility of proclaimin g ju st ification by grace throug h faith. This is the final, the ultim ate, word . But there is a p e nultim a te, a way which mu st be trav e rsed before the ultimate, although there is no g uarante e th a t th e way lead s to th e ultim ate. Ju st ification is God's g ift, but th e g ift is g ive n within a situation. Th e church h as a respons ibility to this situation. The church is related to the penultimate as well as to the ultimate.
The question for the church within the penultimate is whether the s itu a tion , the natural , is open or closed to Christ. Thus the church is conce rn ed with "thos e attitudes or forms . . . which obviously obstruct belief in Christ." 20 The church, as th e community in which justifi ca tion and renew al (indirectly ap propriated by the society in which the church exists) is realized, has both a positiv e and a negative role.
The n ega tive role of the church, in the concern for the penultimate, is the r emov al of those obstructions which make society relatively closed to Christ. Here th e church would be, in rega rd to the crisis of nuclear power, concerned to maintain the power of the state, a matter discussed above. "Wh at is intended here is not Christian action, but an action which d oes not ex clude Christ." 27 " The Church cannot indeed proclaim a concrete earthly order which follows as a necessary consequence from faith in Jesu s Christ, but she can and must oppose every concrete order which constitutes an offence to faith in Je sus Christ, and in doing this she defines, at least negatively , the limits for an order within which faith in Jesus Christ and obedience are possible." 28
In her more po sitive role, "not by the authority of God, but merely on the authority of th e responsible advice of Christian specialists and exp e rts, she will be able to m ake her cont ribution towards the establishment of a new order . " 2 n Th e positive role of the church, in regard to the penultimate , is indirect and is mediat ed through Chri stian specialists. The responsibility rests prim ar ily upon those in responsible positions in g overnm ent. Even here th e role of the church is largely to keep the action of the state within the limit of the civil mandate, thus maintaining the church's own freedom to proclaim the gospel of justification, to declare the ultimate.
Here we come to the miracl e of faith, the heart of the Christian ethic for Bonhoeffer. Everything thus far h as been prolegomena . "Faith is a
2 r. The precise boundari es o f th e mand a tes are not d efin ed by Bonho e ff e r , a nd a ny g iv e n it e m mi g ht be debated. But sin ce this e mb argo applied only to military goods, we assume Bonhoeffer would h ave co n si d ere d this l eg itimat e . Ce rt a inly thi s matter did no t transgress the limit s of the ot h e r mandates.
27 P . 325. Bonho effer's exa mpl e is eco n om ic, but illustrates every e thi ca l situation.
2 8 P. 305
29 P. 324.
passive submi ssion to an action, and in this submi ssio n alon e it is itself a n act ion ." 3 ° Faith is created by Christ alone.'11 With faith comes love and h ope . 3 2 For the miracle of faith sets life upon a n ew foundation. "This foundation is th e life, the death, and the resurr ec tion of th e Lord Jesu s Chri st. " 3 3 Fait h is the accep tan ce of the will of God, revea l ed concretely in th e inc arnate, cru cifi ed , and risen Lord ." 3 1 Now we have l ef t th e penultimat e, an d are d ea ling with th e ultim ate We have found what "shares" with the situation in the formation of the concrete deed. It is the will of Go d. The challenge facing the Christian, facing the church, is to show that Christ is th e livin g Lord of the concrete world. To show thi s the Chri st must be appare nt as th e Inc arnate, Crucified, and Ris e n One . We shall t ake each of these in order
A. TH E INCARNATE LORD
In the incarn ation God declares that he love s the world as it is, that God h as tak e n upon himself bodily all human being. The love of God does not withdraw from reality, nor seek tho se noble souls that seek escape from li fe. "Go d loves the world . It is not an ideal man that He loves, but man as he is; not an ideal world, but the re al world." 3 5
In lovin g man as h e is , God frees m a n to respond to him as he is. Man is freed from shame, which is man's rec oll ection of his disunity with God 30
To ide alize m an, to flatter him , to deny his weaknesses, is not to love man. It is rather to mock the real man. This God does not do "God loves the real man. God became a real m an . " 37 But to detest man, to dwell on his wickedness, is not to love the real man either. This can only drive th e "good p eo ple" from the hypocrisy of the church , a hypocrisy uncovered and purge d in times of stress when the "good people" return to the church , their mother. 38 To exalt man 's virtues or his vices is to hate man . But God shows his love for man by becoming a real man, a ·man who knew both flattery and despisement.
Relating the form of the Incarnate Lord to the problem of nuclear power , we can only insist that God's love for man makes most evident
ao p , 325.
a1p , 80.
3 2 P. 99.
3 3 p , 80.
34 Ibid.
3r>This tri ad is found repeatedly, e.g., in pp. 17ff., 27ff., 89ff , 157ff. Lat er the terms c han ge to " th e origin , esse n ce, a nd goa l of li fe," pp . 189ff., 19 6ff., 203. H ere Bonhoeffer a lso uses th e ter ms of Barth's Church D ogmatics , "c r eat ion, r eco n ciliation , and r e d em ption ."
3G P. 9 .
3 7 Pp 1 45ff. as p, 19.
that the destruction of man is unfaithfulness to God's self-revelation in J esus Christ. To kill is to crucify th e Christ.
At the sa me tim e, conformation to the Incarnate Lord demand s the ack nowled gement that the death of men will not be halted by mere pronounc eme nt s about the sin of murder . No appeal to any principle ba se d upon the worth of man can be used effectively. Moreover, any appeal to any other principle is to idealize man, to deal with a man who is not real. Any "ban the bomb" policy refuses to take man seriously, refuses to love, as God loves, the man who doe s not live by asserted policies, but persists in performing the evil he knows ht ought not to do .
Conformation to the Incarnate One demands the acknowledgement, moreover , that there are times when not only can the state not be trusted to preserve life, but that there are times when the state can be expected to destroy life. It was with the sanction of the state that the life of the Incarnate One was taken.
But conformation here continues to impress upon the conformed the love for the man who has made of God ' s world a path to the abyss, who has abused God 's creation. Wh at the incarnation declares is that God loves th e real man, who is both created and sinner. What conformity to the incarnation declares is this same love.
It is here that Bonhoeffer brings to light what is precisely wrong with those who assert, for instance, that the World Council of Churches should ban the membership of the Russian Church because this will tempt the Council to deal softly with Communism. Bonhoeffer here asserts that the only way for the church to speak responsibly to Communism is to know that she speaks to herself. Only by identity with man can the church speak for, and to, man . The crisis of the nuclear age, with its world-wide implications, can be addressed responsibly only by a world -wide church, a church informed by its universal membership as to the implications of the actions it takes. Only a church incarnate within communism can expect to be heard, to be listened to (if even then), by communism. The church can speak about Cuba on ly when the church speaks from, as well as to, and about, Cuba.
The Christian, and the church, cannot speak or act responsibly unless he lives at the center of the world. The incarnation manifests identity with sinful flesh The incarnation demands the acceptance of guilt. 39
B. THE CRUCIFIED LORD
Conformity to the crucified Lord is to acknowledge that we cannot stand before God except by grace. We can listen to his will only in the context of his grace. We can obey only the Lord who has "delivered us 3UCf. pp 18 lff.
out of the land of Egypt, the house of bondage." We stand, each day, before the abyss . But we stand by his grace. All life is under the shadow of the cross.
The cross displays no relaxation of God's commandment. 10 That commandment stands before us in every situation. "The will of God may lie very deeply concealed beneath a great number of available possibilities." 41 The cross declares that we must explore every available possibility for obedience, even to the obedience of the cross, of death. This is the radical nature of obedience.
This conformity to the Crucified One demands acceptance of the structures of responsibility by which we are bound, the acceptance of deputyship, of inferiority, of the reality of things. Conformation to the Crucified One demands the admission that we do not possess the answer to the dilemma of our existence. The answer is beyond us. And the lack of a solution to the problem, if it leads us to admit our failure to know the answer, may be more helpful than a solution.
Conformity to the Crucified One demands of us the acknowledgement that the alternatives are not simply life or death . The alternatives are death within obedience and death in disobedience. The cross cannot be avoided . But God can bring life from death. And every day he gives is a day we do not deserve, a day for which we must be grateful.
To conform to the Crucified is to withstand the pressures of time. It is to resist the temptations to act hurriedly, as if one's action were necessary, and could alone transform the future. It is also to resist the ' temptations to postpone action completely, as if God demanded no response from us. To conform to the Crucified is, simply, to sacrifice one's self-will to the will of God, wherever it is manifested. For Bonhoeffer it is no problem to locate where this will is manifested. If the command is not concrete, it is not a command. He assumes man's ability to respond, man's responsibility.
c. THE RISEN LORD
To conform to the Risen Lord is to be a new man before the Lord, freed from the threat of death. It is to be in life though in the midst of death. It is to live in a reality beyond the possibilities of the penultimate. As the resurrection cannot be derived from the crucifixion, so the new life cannot be derived from the old . It is God's gift.
But the resurrection does not annul the penultimate. It rather breaks into the penultimate with greater power. It does not deny life, but provides it abundantly.
·1ocf. pp. 45ff., 209ff.
HThis is the theme of The Cost of Discipleship.
"The new man liv es in the world li ke any othe r man." 42 His li fe is a hidden life , " life hid with Chri st in God." Thus th ere are no new forms brought int o li fe by the resurrection. One cannot pattern th e future , predict the shape of th e Kingdom of God This would be to deny the sovereignty of grace. Abraham went out, "not knowing whither he went "
The goa l of th e life conformed to th e Ri se n One is not survi va l, but, as Paul said, "if by any means I may at tai n unto th e resurrection from th e dead." This co nformity acknowledges th at we live in a dying world. One of th e portents of th e end of th e world is th e de struction of the natural. But within thi s dying world th ere is always h ope. The natural always su rvives th e unn a tural. And the Word of God is not confined to the n atural .'13
Bonhoeffer h as no illu sions about th e effec t of conformity to the Incarnate, Cru cified, and Ri sen Lord upon the world. The church indeed is to be co nformed . This is h er future . But the world has a different future. It shou l d certainly be born e 'in mind that it must be a different sense that one speaks of the ju st ifi catio n and renewa l of the Church and of th e justifi cat ion a nd renewal of the western world . The church is ju sti fi ed and renewed throu g h h er faith in Christ, that is to say throu g h submi ss ion to the form of Christ. The western world, as a hi stori ca l a nd political , form , ca n be "justified and r enewed" only indirectly, throu g h th e faith of th e church. The church experiences in faith th e forgiveness of all her sins and a new beg inning through g ra ce. For the nations there is only a healing of the wound , a cica trization of g uilt , in th e return to order, to justi ce, to pe ace, and to the granting of fr ee p assage to th e Church's procl am ation of Jesus Christ .'14
But this di stinction in the form of renewal for the church and for the world does not minimi ze the world. Rath er , the church is conformed to Christ most obviously when this conformity is for the sake of th e world. The church stands where th e world ought to be standin g. She exists for the sake of th e world
Moreov er, the world receives her own fulfilment at the point where the church stands. "The earth is the 'new creation', the 'new creature,' th e goa l of th e ways of God on earth. The congregation stands in thi s twofold rel at ionship of deputyship entirely in the fellowship and di sc ipl ehood of its Lord, who was Christ precisely in this, that He existed not for His own sake but wholly for the sake of the world." 45
This completes our survey and reconst ru ction of th e Ethics of Bonhoeff er in an effort to see its relevance in a nucle ar age. From Bonhoef-
42P. 161.
43P 19; cf. also p. 90.
44 Pp 105f.
15 P. 52.
fer's perspective we have justified ethical concern for this issue, considered his description of the si tuation , and explored the two powers, the restraining state and the redeeming Word. The miracle of faith speaks both to the penultimate and the ultimat e; in the latter its power appears in conformity to the Incarnate, Crucified, and Risen Lord.
The further one travels this path to obedience, the less obvious becomes the shape of the deed. Bonhoeffer does not present a clear guide to action. But he does make clear why no such guide can exist. And he does make clear that the l ack of such a guide does not absolve from responsibility. In relation to the mandates , where the commandments are always concrete, some things can be said. Our responsibility to the state is obvio us in Bonhoeffer. But the form which th e miracle takes is not so obvious. We can see only beg innin gs here , a conformation to the Incarnate One in the identification of the church with those on both sides of the political issue. The form of the cross and of the tomb have not yet appeared. The former is always over the world; the latter may remain hidden.
Bonhoeffer's Ethics represents an effort to maintain the commandments of God in an age when they appear to be possible of fulfillment in only ambiguous ways. There is no relaxation of the will of God. He ca ll s for "radical obedience ." Yet this is matched by a transparent confrontation of rea lity. The ambiguities of the situat ion do not deaden, do not enervate, the responsible man. Rather, in Christ man is set free for action. His concern is not for the good, an abstraction he cannot retain , but for the form of Christ which informs him. Bonhoeffer assumes human responsibi lity , the ability to respond by grace to the will of God revealed in Christ.
What one can say, from the perspective of Bonhoeffer, in a nuclear age is not much more than Bonhoeffer himself said frequently. "We do not know what to do, but our eyes are upon thee" (II Chron. 20:12.).
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL APPENDIX
This paper makes exp li cit use of on ly one book by Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Ethics, by Di e trich Bonhoeffer, edited by Eberhard Bethge, translat ed by Nevill e Horton Smith, Macmill a n , New York, 1955. However, our understandin g of Bonhoeffer has been aided by other of his works which at the very least deserve acknowledgement: Act and Being, translated by Bernard Noble (London: Collins, 1962).
The Cost of Discipleship , translated by R. H. Fu ll er (New York: M acm illan, 1960)
Life Together, translated by John W. Doberstein (N ew York: Harpers, 1954).
P1·iso11er for God , transl a ted by R. H . Fu ll er (New York : Macmillan, 1960).
M o r eove r , seco nd a r y so urces h ave a lso b ee n u sed, a nd pr oved be n efi cia l:
"D ietrich Bon h oe ffei"'s L ife and T hou g ht ," th e Ald e n -Tuth i ll Lectures a t th e C hi ca.go Th eo log ica l Se minar y, Januar y 16-19, 196 1, g ive n by Eberhard Be th ge, in mim eogra ph ed form.
The Place of Bo11ho eff er , edit ed by 1Vfartin Mart y (N ew Yo rk: Association Pr tss, 19 62 ).
The Th eo logy of Di e1rich Bonhoeff e,. , by John D . Godsey, Philade lphi a: The Westminster Pr ess, 1960) .