"It was not the object of the Prophets...to close the gate of investigation [into the incorporeal, or the metaphysical]...and to prevent the mind from comprehending what is within its reach, as is imagined by simple and idle people, whom it suits better to put forth their ignorance and incapacity as wisdom...and to regard the distinction and wisdom of others as irreligion and imperfection...The whole object of...the Sages was to declare that a limit is set to human reason where it must halt...."
-- Moses Maimonides; The Guide for the Perplexed; circa 1190.
This letter represents certain comments I had in answer to an article, "Eric Metaxas’s Bonhoeffer Delusions" published by the e-gazette, Religion and Politics Fit for Polite Company. That article basically refuted the assertions of Eric Metaxas -- author of Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy -- that the great German and resolutely anti-Nazi theologian would be an evangelical conservative, were he alive today.
Digging below the politics is an interesting discussion of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and, to paraphrase his nemesis, 'the use and mis-use of mystery'. There are specific comments I would like to make.
First, at Saint Mary's Episcopal in Birmingham, Alabama, I sat in during the latter half of the course based on the Metaxas book and developed by the author himself; it was not politicized, thankfully.
Second, the ethics of assassination break down in the case the von Stauffenberg conspiracy. The German nobleman should have stayed in the room and held the bomb up. The blast would have almost certainly killed Hitler, if not by direct mutilation, then by internal bleeding. But the Count's unwillingness to sacrifice himself to assassinate an evil man not only tainted the ethics of his actions but also rendered ineffective their execution.
Third, my take on 'religionless' Xianity is a pietist position, with which Bonhoeffer would have been familiar, of renewing the faith by re-living, in a modern context, those early days of the Church when there was no doctrine or institutional church to speak of; that is, when Xianity was the new humanism of its day contra-distinguished against the orthodoxy of its anterior religion, Judaism.
Fourth, politicizing a religious figure leads to illusions rather than allusions; that is, a dangerous conflation of faith and ideology that admits no compromise. That is to say: hubris hiding behind a surplice.
Fifth, perhaps the biggest illusion about Bonhoeffer is to assume that his writings from prison not only reflected the essence of his interior life but its entirety. He wrote for, perhaps, two hours each day. That leaves twelve to sixteen hours per day when Bonhoeffer was not writing. Doubtlessly, the modern saint spent much of that time in the prayer and contemplation subsequently articulated in his writings, but all fourteen hours?
I doubt it.
His writings were likely the high point of his day -- or of those days during which he chose to write. This observation is not a criticism of a man light-years ahead of me. It is to say that Bonhoeffer likely struggled with isolation, fear and despair but managed to overcome them. It is Bonhoeffer's example of holding at bay these latter, very human struggles that gives one hope that (s)he can do the same under wretched circumstances. It is his Grace -- elected by him, made manifest by him and triumphal in his subsequent behavior -- that makes Bonhoeffer a saint.
Sixth, Humanism -- when one looks at its tenets -- is often the very mainstreaming of values Xians hold dear. Instead of condemning its 'godlessness' (sic), one should welcome these fellow pilgrims as we all have 'trod the path of youth'. Xianity is about a message of hope and conciliation and gradual redemption through a lifetime of progressive Grace. How these values differ in their practice -- right here, right now -- from most, if not all, of the eight values articulated by Humanism is beyond me. Much as Xianity globalized Judaism so, too, does humanism mainstream Abrahamist ethics.
In truth, the Humanist ideal of the "happy human" sounds an awful lot like the idea of living in Grace (i.e., to experience redemptive rapture). To me, Humanism may lack spiritual sizzle but it sets a high bar of ethics by which one seeks to live. In the end, one of the two will be correct: following death will be a new existence or mere extinction; that distinction has little bearing on how I act today. By the way, I avoid the term 'Secular Humanism' since that is a politicized term used by politicized Xians to denote atheism. Some of the best, most ethical people I know are atheists.
Seventh, religiously based political propositions need to be based on pacific persuasion rather than chronic coercion. That is to say: the rightness of a political principle rooted in religion should become manifestly self-evident over time. If it does not, perhaps the individual invoking those religious beliefs ought to reconsider his or her position. From a Xian view: J.C. was nothing if not open minded. The only exception? When a manifest evil is emerging that arguably will lead to brutal policies and persecution of others, whatever their beliefs, backgrounds or pacific peculiarities. That is the difficult distinction that Bonhoeffer had to make; and he did so, very bravely.
